7 ms·

I kind of hate the Flipper Zero on principle. It's basically a script kiddy device for hardware. People use them to essentially DDOS cell phones with BLE connec

I kind of hate the Flipper Zero on principle. It's basically a script kiddy device for hardware. People use them to essentially DDOS cell phones with BLE connection requests. You can do it with any micro controller with a 2.4ghz radio, but this thing makes it easy for annoying people to just pull a script from the internet and make it everyone else's problem.

ganoushoreilly 3y ago
Script kiddies aren't new, they will always be around regardless of the tools. The response is build better tools to mitigate their rudimentary attacks.
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  That works OK if you can deploy through the net. But many devices are not net connected (eg garage door openers) and we've seen the many problems with trying to make every electrical appliance net connected - surveillance, data leaks, remote shutdowns, device bricking when then IP connectivity goes down. Technology shouldn't force consumers into endless upgrade cycles in the name of better security.
techplex 3y ago
Why not hate the cell phone manufacturers for not making secure devices?
pierat 3y ago
It's OK. We hate your apple devices too. BTW, wanna connect to the Apple TV? :D
jwr 3y ago
It's also a pretty useful device if you are into electronics. Or need backups of your access cards. Or of your silly garage key fobs. There are many great uses of this thing. I'm also annoyed by the script kiddies, but I do like the device. A lot.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
clarkrinker 3y ago
I’m running this in the coffee shop now in honor of this comment
diggan 3y ago
> and make it everyone else's problem Seems like the focus should be on who is allowing and enabling this type of usage. Manufacturers, since they do not act of their own free will, need to be compelled to actually release secure software. If anything, I love that the Flipper Zero is revealing how vulnerable a lot of this technology is. It hasn't been this easy before to execute radio hacks while mobile, nor in such a game-like/product format. Consequently, I think many people have not realized how secure their devices actually are. It seems that people are finally becoming aware of how unsafe many of these products are. Unfortunately, they are mistakenly focusing the blame on the wrong party. Fixing the security holes also protects everything against truly "evil malicious" actors, not just "fun malicious" actors, so it has its benefits to force manufacturers to up their game.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
  Manufacturers can do better but aren't these users committing felonies? Why aren't we focusing on that? Also- maybe we don't want to deal with all the extra BS that secure RF requires.
- kube-system 3y ago
  RF jammers also expose how vulnerable most RF devices are to DOS attacks. But I don't think that's particularly helpful to anyone, nor should those devices be unrestricted in their distribution or use. RF spectrum inherently requires rules and cooperation -- if it were a free for all, user beware type of situation, it just wouldn't work.
  - kstrauser 3y ago
    The Flipper Zero scaremongering isn't about DoS attacks, but about protocol attacks. It probably could be used as a jammer but that's not interesting. It's more useful for demonstrating that a lot of firmware is about as secure as using plaintext telnet with u/p "admin/admin".
    - kube-system 3y ago
      The GP mentioned DoS attacks which was why I pulled on that thread. The vulnerabilities exploited by this Flipper Zero are not novel, they're already known to industry experts. The main difference with this device that they're more accessible to non-technical folks. That in and of itself is bringing attention to the issue, but is that really helpful? To me, it seems akin to handing out bricks in nice neighborhoods to highlight the security weaknesses posed by windows without bars on them. Security is not without cost. The ideal society to live in is not one with the most security, it is the one with the most trust. A lot about order in society relies on most mischievants being actors of opportunity.
kj4ips 3y ago
I don't think it is limited to skiddie use, it's a nice hardware platform that is pretty easy to write for. I've gotten my kabuki desuicide pretty much functional on it. It's already FCC'd, has a BMS and lots of other things that are a pain to get right. There is something about lowering the bar to disruption, and the possibility of this causing a bit of a reckoning for devices that don't do a good job of "Accepting any interference received"
user_7832 3y ago
Do you also dislike say the arduino or the raspberry pi which popularized sbcs/microcontrollers, as they can be used for nefarious tasks? What about bell labs, without whom none of these issues would have occurred? Technology will always develop, it's important to plan and regulate it, sure, but bans are need to be extremely carefully thought out to enforce well.
- SpicyLemonZest 3y ago
  If you choose, as Flipper Zero has, to market your device as a tool for "pentesting radio protocols, access control systems, hardware", I think you have some responsibility to mitigate the obvious and trivially foreseeable consequence of people using it to just outright penetrate those things.
  - user_7832 3y ago
    That's fair, I wasn't aware that was how they advertised it. I would hope they use more responsible advertising, however I still don't think that deserves it to be banned.
  - skjoldr 3y ago
    How do the developers of Kali Linux mitigate against black hats? They don't. It's impossible.
    - SpicyLemonZest 3y ago
      They don't, for example, make posts on the front page of their public website (https://flipperzero.one/ https://flipperzero.one/) about specific technologies such as key cards which are subject to easy exploitation.
- dmonitor 3y ago
  i’d be more forgiving of the device if it had practical utility beyond “fucking up other people’s shit”. for me it’s in the same category as stink bombs, glitter bombs, and vuvuzelas.
ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
People are already driving around with fake base stations sending scam sms impersonating legit senders
yummypaint 3y ago
Part of the problem is that the design feels somewhat toy-like with the bright plastic etc. This makes using it feel like a game, and masks the seriousness of potential consequences. Some people have implanted insulin pumps and other medical devices controlled over bluetooth, and a flipper zero user may have no concept of this.
- giantg2 3y ago
  "medical devices controlled over bluetooth, and a flipper zero user may have no concept of this." And they would if it were not in a "bright plastic case"?
- kstrauser 3y ago
  That last bit is absolutely infuriating. Medical device manufacturers are cranking out insecure devices that rely on security through obscurity. No, I don't think people should be using Flipper Zeros to hack someone else's insulin pump. It's also unforgivable that someone should make an insulin pump that another can hack with a Flipper Zero. I use netcat for legitimate things every day. If someone made an IP server that I could hack with netcat, they should be ashamed of themselves. It's not netcat's fault that their security sucks. Well, same with Flipper Zero.
jasonjayr 3y ago
On the other hand, it's exposing just how sloppy devices are with their wireless signals + code handlers. IIRC this is in Canada, but in US (and probably Canada too), FCC has rules against creating harmful interference. Fine + punish the people creating the interference, rather than the tools that people can use to learn, debug + protect these devices that are vulnerable.
- Kuinox 3y ago
  Security is needed because somes doesn't want to play by the rules. If nobody try to breaking in, why bother putting a lock on your door ?
- dymk 3y ago
  That's like saying any infrastructure is sloppily done because it's vulnerable to DDoS attacks. DDoS attacks are already illegal, but people still perform attacks. That's not the site operator's fault, and it's victim blaming.
  - kstrauser 3y ago
    Except here "DDoS" means "one person with a $200 radio". I don't expect my devices to stand up to prolonged attacks against state actors. I do hope they can survive someone sending them invalid packets.
    - dymk 3y ago
      Oh they'll survive invalid packets. It's the sheer amount of packets that are the problem, and wireless signals are just inherently hard to protect against malicious jamming.
      - kstrauser 3y ago
        That's not true. Again, forget jamming for a little bit. You can build a jammer with any random spark gap transmitter. The novel attacks are one where a Flipper Zero can send an iPhone 1,000 "hey, I'm an Apple TV, wanna hang out?" messages in a row and the phone acts on each of them. Even if you space those messages out so that they only take a tiny percent of available throughput, the phone's response to the messages will still make it unusable. Because such a flood is now easy to trigger, phones now implement rate limiting that effectively mitigates the attacks. After all, you're not legitimately going to see 1,000 Apple TVs trying to connect at once, so there's no need to give each one of them personal attention.
giantg2 3y ago
Making RF tinkering more accessible is a great way to get actual kids into tech and learning about how stuff works.
iisan7 3y ago
Agreed. I get why folks on this site repeat the mantra that it's shedding light on insecure hardware, and of course that's true. But civilization depends not on ironclad laws and politics, but on good faith actions. An unhackable society would be a pretty miserable one.
JTbane 3y ago
This, I saw an anecdotal Reddit post about a guy DDoSing cell phones in a restaurant and showing off to his table. These kind of devices attract the worst people.
- BizarreByte 3y ago
  These devices attract the very kind of people who cause them to get banned. Sure the device is fine, but not the assholes who want them to fuck with other people.
fencepost 3y ago
People use them to essentially DDOS cell phones with BLE connection requests. That's one of the situations where I'd feel justified in taking a device and stomping it to bits, and I'd support anyone else doing the same. If anyone does encounter this in the wild with Apple devices, first, install your damn updates because I'm pretty positive this is now blocked, but in the meantime turn on Lockdown mode to keep this from interfering with you.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  You might feel justified, but courts would likely disagree. Apropos of anything else, the FCC regs around the 2.4GHz spectrum are pretty explicit, "Part 15 devices ... must accept any interference that may be received". In their eyes, the device that is flawed is the phone, not the Flipper.
  - BenjiWiebe 3y ago
    I believe there's equivalent language (even for licensed uses) about not causing interference, so probably the Flipper and the phone are doing poorly here.
    - FireBeyond 3y ago
      My understanding, entirely possible that it is incorrect, is that the "not causing interference" is to "authorized services", i.e. specifically licensed frequencies and users/devices, not other users of those "free-for-all" spectrums. But I may well be wrong, in which case I would agree with you.
  - fencepost 3y ago
    I've been at a conference where someone decided doing this would be amusing. I'm pretty positive there would have been widespread support for addressing the issue with a little property destruction, with the alternative being "Congratulations, you've shown you can't play nicely. Your admission to the conference is revoked, you're blacklisted from our future conferences, and we'll let the organizers of other local conferences know your name and why you're banned from our conference so they'll be forewarned." As for courts, if this hadn't already been resolved (at least on iOS) I wonder if you could request that jurors and the judge turn their phones on for a demonstration. Given the state of Android updates in the general public, it'd probably still be effective on a significant percentage of people.
2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
Agreed. If people could do it before then why weren't they?
skjoldr 3y ago
Buddy, I'm from Ukraine and drone jammer and drone early warning schematics are basically public knowledge at this point. Drones mostly use the same sub-1GHz bands, 2.4 GHz bands and 5 Ghz bands that other consumer electronics also use. You can't put this genie back into the bottle. Both radio- and cyberwarfare are here to stay. Y'all just don't know it yet. After the war there are going to exist a whole bunch of people who know how to deny GPS, defend against drones, build attack drones that bypass primitive countermeasures, spoof mobile networks, monitor the RF space for unencrypted signals, and set up actually secure comms. And not all of them are going to remain completely silent about all of this. Toys like Flipper are going to be the least problematic. Banning it achieves nothing.

ganoushoreilly 3y ago

Script kiddies aren't new, they will always be around regardless of the tools. The response is build better tools to mitigate their rudimentary attacks.

anigbrowl 3y ago
That works OK if you can deploy through the net. But many devices are not net connected (eg garage door openers) and we've seen the many problems with trying to make every electrical appliance net connected - surveillance, data leaks, remote shutdowns, device bricking when then IP connectivity goes down. Technology shouldn't force consumers into endless upgrade cycles in the name of better security.

techplex 3y ago

Why not hate the cell phone manufacturers for not making secure devices?

pierat 3y ago

It's OK. We hate your apple devices too. BTW, wanna connect to the Apple TV? :D

jwr 3y ago

It's also a pretty useful device if you are into electronics. Or need backups of your access cards. Or of your silly garage key fobs. There are many great uses of this thing. I'm also annoyed by the script kiddies, but I do like the device. A lot.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

clarkrinker 3y ago

I’m running this in the coffee shop now in honor of this comment

diggan 3y ago

> and make it everyone else's problem Seems like the focus should be on who is allowing and enabling this type of usage. Manufacturers, since they do not act of their own free will, need to be compelled to actually release secure software. If anything, I love that the Flipper Zero is revealing how vulnerable a lot of this technology is. It hasn't been this easy before to execute radio hacks while mobile, nor in such a game-like/product format. Consequently, I think many people have not realized how secure their devices actually are. It seems that people are finally becoming aware of how unsafe many of these products are. Unfortunately, they are mistakenly focusing the blame on the wrong party. Fixing the security holes also protects everything against truly "evil malicious" actors, not just "fun malicious" actors, so it has its benefits to force manufacturers to up their game.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
Manufacturers can do better but aren't these users committing felonies? Why aren't we focusing on that? Also- maybe we don't want to deal with all the extra BS that secure RF requires.
kube-system 3y ago
RF jammers also expose how vulnerable most RF devices are to DOS attacks. But I don't think that's particularly helpful to anyone, nor should those devices be unrestricted in their distribution or use. RF spectrum inherently requires rules and cooperation -- if it were a free for all, user beware type of situation, it just wouldn't work.
- kstrauser 3y ago
  The Flipper Zero scaremongering isn't about DoS attacks, but about protocol attacks. It probably could be used as a jammer but that's not interesting. It's more useful for demonstrating that a lot of firmware is about as secure as using plaintext telnet with u/p "admin/admin".
  - kube-system 3y ago
    The GP mentioned DoS attacks which was why I pulled on that thread. The vulnerabilities exploited by this Flipper Zero are not novel, they're already known to industry experts. The main difference with this device that they're more accessible to non-technical folks. That in and of itself is bringing attention to the issue, but is that really helpful? To me, it seems akin to handing out bricks in nice neighborhoods to highlight the security weaknesses posed by windows without bars on them. Security is not without cost. The ideal society to live in is not one with the most security, it is the one with the most trust. A lot about order in society relies on most mischievants being actors of opportunity.

kj4ips 3y ago

I don't think it is limited to skiddie use, it's a nice hardware platform that is pretty easy to write for. I've gotten my kabuki desuicide pretty much functional on it. It's already FCC'd, has a BMS and lots of other things that are a pain to get right. There is something about lowering the bar to disruption, and the possibility of this causing a bit of a reckoning for devices that don't do a good job of "Accepting any interference received"

user_7832 3y ago

Do you also dislike say the arduino or the raspberry pi which popularized sbcs/microcontrollers, as they can be used for nefarious tasks? What about bell labs, without whom none of these issues would have occurred? Technology will always develop, it's important to plan and regulate it, sure, but bans are need to be extremely carefully thought out to enforce well.

SpicyLemonZest 3y ago
If you choose, as Flipper Zero has, to market your device as a tool for "pentesting radio protocols, access control systems, hardware", I think you have some responsibility to mitigate the obvious and trivially foreseeable consequence of people using it to just outright penetrate those things.
- user_7832 3y ago
  That's fair, I wasn't aware that was how they advertised it. I would hope they use more responsible advertising, however I still don't think that deserves it to be banned.
- skjoldr 3y ago
  How do the developers of Kali Linux mitigate against black hats? They don't. It's impossible.
  - SpicyLemonZest 3y ago
    They don't, for example, make posts on the front page of their public website (https://flipperzero.one/ https://flipperzero.one/) about specific technologies such as key cards which are subject to easy exploitation.
dmonitor 3y ago
i’d be more forgiving of the device if it had practical utility beyond “fucking up other people’s shit”. for me it’s in the same category as stink bombs, glitter bombs, and vuvuzelas.

ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago

People are already driving around with fake base stations sending scam sms impersonating legit senders

yummypaint 3y ago

Part of the problem is that the design feels somewhat toy-like with the bright plastic etc. This makes using it feel like a game, and masks the seriousness of potential consequences. Some people have implanted insulin pumps and other medical devices controlled over bluetooth, and a flipper zero user may have no concept of this.

giantg2 3y ago
"medical devices controlled over bluetooth, and a flipper zero user may have no concept of this." And they would if it were not in a "bright plastic case"?
kstrauser 3y ago
That last bit is absolutely infuriating. Medical device manufacturers are cranking out insecure devices that rely on security through obscurity. No, I don't think people should be using Flipper Zeros to hack someone else's insulin pump. It's also unforgivable that someone should make an insulin pump that another can hack with a Flipper Zero. I use netcat for legitimate things every day. If someone made an IP server that I could hack with netcat, they should be ashamed of themselves. It's not netcat's fault that their security sucks. Well, same with Flipper Zero.

jasonjayr 3y ago

On the other hand, it's exposing just how sloppy devices are with their wireless signals + code handlers. IIRC this is in Canada, but in US (and probably Canada too), FCC has rules against creating harmful interference. Fine + punish the people creating the interference, rather than the tools that people can use to learn, debug + protect these devices that are vulnerable.

Kuinox 3y ago
Security is needed because somes doesn't want to play by the rules. If nobody try to breaking in, why bother putting a lock on your door ?
dymk 3y ago
That's like saying any infrastructure is sloppily done because it's vulnerable to DDoS attacks. DDoS attacks are already illegal, but people still perform attacks. That's not the site operator's fault, and it's victim blaming.
- kstrauser 3y ago
  Except here "DDoS" means "one person with a $200 radio". I don't expect my devices to stand up to prolonged attacks against state actors. I do hope they can survive someone sending them invalid packets.
  - dymk 3y ago
    Oh they'll survive invalid packets. It's the sheer amount of packets that are the problem, and wireless signals are just inherently hard to protect against malicious jamming.
    - kstrauser 3y ago
      That's not true. Again, forget jamming for a little bit. You can build a jammer with any random spark gap transmitter. The novel attacks are one where a Flipper Zero can send an iPhone 1,000 "hey, I'm an Apple TV, wanna hang out?" messages in a row and the phone acts on each of them. Even if you space those messages out so that they only take a tiny percent of available throughput, the phone's response to the messages will still make it unusable. Because such a flood is now easy to trigger, phones now implement rate limiting that effectively mitigates the attacks. After all, you're not legitimately going to see 1,000 Apple TVs trying to connect at once, so there's no need to give each one of them personal attention.

giantg2 3y ago

Making RF tinkering more accessible is a great way to get actual kids into tech and learning about how stuff works.

iisan7 3y ago

Agreed. I get why folks on this site repeat the mantra that it's shedding light on insecure hardware, and of course that's true. But civilization depends not on ironclad laws and politics, but on good faith actions. An unhackable society would be a pretty miserable one.

JTbane 3y ago

This, I saw an anecdotal Reddit post about a guy DDoSing cell phones in a restaurant and showing off to his table. These kind of devices attract the worst people.

BizarreByte 3y ago
These devices attract the very kind of people who cause them to get banned. Sure the device is fine, but not the assholes who want them to fuck with other people.

fencepost 3y ago

People use them to essentially DDOS cell phones with BLE connection requests. That's one of the situations where I'd feel justified in taking a device and stomping it to bits, and I'd support anyone else doing the same. If anyone does encounter this in the wild with Apple devices, first, install your damn updates because I'm pretty positive this is now blocked, but in the meantime turn on Lockdown mode to keep this from interfering with you.

FireBeyond 3y ago
You might feel justified, but courts would likely disagree. Apropos of anything else, the FCC regs around the 2.4GHz spectrum are pretty explicit, "Part 15 devices ... must accept any interference that may be received". In their eyes, the device that is flawed is the phone, not the Flipper.
- BenjiWiebe 3y ago
  I believe there's equivalent language (even for licensed uses) about not causing interference, so probably the Flipper and the phone are doing poorly here.
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    My understanding, entirely possible that it is incorrect, is that the "not causing interference" is to "authorized services", i.e. specifically licensed frequencies and users/devices, not other users of those "free-for-all" spectrums. But I may well be wrong, in which case I would agree with you.
- fencepost 3y ago
  I've been at a conference where someone decided doing this would be amusing. I'm pretty positive there would have been widespread support for addressing the issue with a little property destruction, with the alternative being "Congratulations, you've shown you can't play nicely. Your admission to the conference is revoked, you're blacklisted from our future conferences, and we'll let the organizers of other local conferences know your name and why you're banned from our conference so they'll be forewarned." As for courts, if this hadn't already been resolved (at least on iOS) I wonder if you could request that jurors and the judge turn their phones on for a demonstration. Given the state of Android updates in the general public, it'd probably still be effective on a significant percentage of people.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago

Agreed. If people could do it before then why weren't they?

skjoldr 3y ago

Buddy, I'm from Ukraine and drone jammer and drone early warning schematics are basically public knowledge at this point. Drones mostly use the same sub-1GHz bands, 2.4 GHz bands and 5 Ghz bands that other consumer electronics also use. You can't put this genie back into the bottle. Both radio- and cyberwarfare are here to stay. Y'all just don't know it yet. After the war there are going to exist a whole bunch of people who know how to deny GPS, defend against drones, build attack drones that bypass primitive countermeasures, spoof mobile networks, monitor the RF space for unencrypted signals, and set up actually secure comms. And not all of them are going to remain completely silent about all of this. Toys like Flipper are going to be the least problematic. Banning it achieves nothing.