Breaking News
News & Analysis

Broadcom Rides Bluetooth to IoT

Chips supports RSA, wireless charging
5/21/2014 06:25 AM EDT
3 comments
NO RATINGS
1 saves
More Related Links
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Lauree
User Rank
Author
Re: RSA key exhange over Bluetooth
Lauree   5/24/2014 2:30:43 AM
NO RATINGS
Even I have heard about this that Bluetooth LE pairing is not based on RSA public-key key exchange.

I am too waiting for the answer.


Thanks,

Lauree

Ruby on Rails Developer

 

y_sasaki
User Rank
Author
RSA key exhange over Bluetooth
y_sasaki   5/21/2014 6:41:34 PM
NO RATINGS
As long as I've read Bluetooth 4.1 Core Specification, Bluetooth LE pairing (key exchange) is done with pseudo-random and hash. In other words, it is not based on RSA public-key key exchange. There is notion that says future version of Bluetooth will include "elliptic curve cryptography and Diffie-Hellman public key exchanges" (Volume 3, Part H, Section 2.3.1), but still no mention to RSA public key exchange.

 

RSA is well-defined, widely adopted, relatively lightweight (compare to DH or EC), considered to be very secure public key algorithm. Security on internet (SSL/TLS) is almost dominated by RSA (though TLS also supports DH, rarely used in practice). RSA is also popular in WiFi enterprise security, which uses essentially same TLS protocol over EAP framework.

Definately 4Kbit hardware-accelarated RSA engine is something "nice to have". However, as long as I read Bluetooth core spec, RSA is not adopted as standard as I wrote above.

In the end my question is, is RSA-based Bluetooth security is propriately to Broadcomm chipset, or are they (Broadcomm) want it to be part of Bluetooth SIG standard?

Susan Rambo
User Rank
Author
Blame the user?
Susan Rambo   5/21/2014 1:22:51 PM
NO RATINGS
Hi Jessica, what did the Broadcom executive say about why the user is the "security hole"? 

Most Recent Comments
michigan0
 
SteveHarris0
 
realjjj
 
SteveHarris0
 
SteveHarris0
 
VicVat
 
Les_Slater
 
SSDWEM
 
witeken
Most Recent Messages
9/25/2016
4:48:30 PM
michigan0 Sang Kim First, 28nm bulk is in volume manufacturing for several years by the major semiconductor companies but not 28nm FDSOI today yet. Why not? Simply because unlike 28nm bulk the LDD(Lightly Doped Drain) to minimize hot carrier generation can't be implemented in 28nm FDSOI. Furthermore, hot carrier reliability becomes worse with scaling, That is the major reason why 28nm FDSOI is not manufacturable today and will not be. Second, how can you suppress the leakage currents from such ultra short 7nm due to the short channel effects? How thin SOI thickness is required to prevent punch-through of un-dopped 7nm FDSOI? Possibly less than 4nm. Depositing such an ultra thin film less then 4nm filum uniformly and reliably over 12" wafers at the manufacturing line is extremely difficult or not even manufacturable. If not manufacturable, the 7nm FDSOI debate is over!Third, what happens when hot carriers are generated near the drain at normal operation of 7nm FDSOI? Electrons go to the positively biased drain with no harm but where the holes to go? The holes can't go to the substrate because of the thin BOX layer. Some holes may become trapped at the BOX layer causing Vt shift. However, the vast majority of holes drift through the the un-dopped SOI channel toward the N+Source,...

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed