Return-Path: Message-ID: <426F539B.4030701@gmx.ch> From: Marco Trudel MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bluez-users] implementing security mode 2 or 3 References: <426E0C5A.8060203@gmx.ch> <200504261153.08434.bluez-user@schaettgen.de> <426E5CCC.2030108@gmx.ch> <1114530540.10706.301.camel@pegasus> <426E6516.3010403@gmx.ch> <1114532376.10706.310.camel@pegasus> <426E6F60.2020000@gmx.ch> <1114534837.10706.320.camel@pegasus> <426E7B12.6040602@gmx.ch> In-Reply-To: <426E7B12.6040602@gmx.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: bluez-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: bluez-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Reply-To: bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: BlueZ users List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 10:55:55 +0200 Hello Marcel what's the state? interested in doing that? regards Marco Marco Trudel wrote: > Marcel Holtmann wrote: > >> Hi Marco, >> >> >>>>>> the 2.6.7 will fail. The needed security hooks are introduced with >>>>>> 2.6.10 and the RFCOMM service level security with 2.6.11 according >>>>>> to my >>>>>> patch logs. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> If not, which part of the kernel has to be fixed? Is it a part of >>>>>>> bluez? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It is inside the BlueZ core and the RFCOMM layer. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> How long would you have to backport that to kernel 2.6.7? >>>>> Maybe we can arrainge something with a donation... >>>> >>>> >>>> tell me what interfaces are you going to use. Is it always USB? What >>>> kernel layers are involved? RFCOMM, BNEP, CMTP, HIDP? >>> >>> >>> always USB. RFCOMM services. >>> >>> authentication/encryption enabled as suggested on the list: >>> int opt = RFCOMM_LM_AUTH|RFCOMM_LM_ENCRYPT; >>> setsockopt(sock, SOL_RFCOMM, RFCOMM_LM, &opt, sizeof(opt)); >> >> >> >> this means HCI, L2CAP, RFCOMM and hci_usb driver updates up to >> 2.6.12-rc2 should be included. > > > sounds reasonable... > >>>> You will need more than this two patches for a 2.6.7 based kernel, >>>> because there are some serious problems, too. >>> >>> >>> actually I never run into problems with the 2.4 kernel. But I think >>> it would definitely make sense to have this things fixed too... >> >> >> >> Some of them were hard to trigger and there is still one RFCOMM thing >> that is unresolved. Btw do you need a SMP or HT kernel? > > > No. I don't think so. > I work with an arm SBC with one processor and a very minimal redhat. not > much fancy stuff... > > regards > Marco > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tell us your software development plans! > Take this survey and enter to win a one-year sub to SourceForge.net > Plus IDC's 2005 look-ahead and a copy of this survey > Click here to start! http://www.idcswdc.com/cgi-bin/survey?id=105hix > _______________________________________________ > Bluez-users mailing list > Bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-users > > ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tell us your software development plans! Take this survey and enter to win a one-year sub to SourceForge.net Plus IDC's 2005 look-ahead and a copy of this survey Click here to start! http://www.idcswdc.com/cgi-bin/survey?id=105hix _______________________________________________ Bluez-users mailing list Bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-users