3 ms·

If this happens, I will hide my phone and insist I don't have one until they give me a real key. This is a complete privacy and security nightmare both from th

If this happens, I will hide my phone and insist I don't have one until they give me a real key. This is a complete privacy and security nightmare both from the potential of cracking it and from installing an app that will probably grab every permission it can. It's also going to be entertaining seeing people with dead batteries begging a charge from people in the lobby.

VLM 13y ago
Just place a "special" charger in the lobby that charges, but also powns the phone and gathers not just all their precious data but gains access to their room. They might not have much to steal, but you'll know there's at least a phone to take. My guess is because none of they crypto is mentioned, its probably some self developed snakeoil, so you might not even need to own their phone. Could be as simple as "bluetooth address whatever, which happens to be in the central DB whitelist, says open sesame" and the door opens. Amusingly I have a moto-X and my BT addrs is 1 less than my wifi MAC so if the security protocol is weak enough to depend on BT addrs, you could sniff the wireless for awhile and then just subtract 1 from each sniffed wifi MAC and have some fun with known good BT addrs. Or perhaps on other phones BT addrs = wifi + 1 instead of minus 1. Whatever.
- blueskin_ 13y ago
  >Just place a "special" charger in the lobby Now this idea, I like. http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/08/beware-of-juice-jacking/ http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/08/beware-of-juice-jacking/ >My guess is because none of they crypto is mentioned, its probably some self developed snakeoil, so you might not even need to own their phone. Could be as simple as "bluetooth address whatever, which happens to be in the central DB whitelist, says open sesame" and the door opens. I would seriously hope for this not to be true, but I've seen too many security fails to think it won't. Access is amazingly rubbish with security, especially when some RFID chip makers actually put a proprietary encryption algorithm as a selling point, when many of those (e.g. mifare) are provably broken.
k-mcgrady 13y ago
>> This is a complete privacy and security nightmare both from the potential of cracking it and from installing an app that will probably grab every permission it can. Aren't hotel room locks already easily cracked? I remember seeing it on HN last year. As for permissions - if you don't like them don't install the app, they aren't going to deny you a key. >> It's also going to be entertaining seeing people with dead batteries begging a charge from people in the lobby. Presumably in this case they would give you a key.
- blueskin_ 13y ago
  >Aren't hotel room locks already easily cracked? They are, but this will only make them worse.
  - lordCarbonFiber 13y ago
    There is no reason to believe that an nfc controled lock is any less secure than a traditional physical tumbler lock. In fact, if set up correctly (well sealed pannel, sound generation of keys, etc), it could be significantly more secure since well set up cryptography is a hell of a lot harder than simple lock picking.
    - Piskvorrr 13y ago
      That's a big "if". Big enough to be implausible - even nuclear missiles were sitting in the silos for years with launch code set to "000000"; what makes you think that hotels will care more about their security? See e.g. this: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/08/hotel_door_lock.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/08/hotel_door_lo... Moreover, the electronic mechanism pretty much never opens the lock: it activates a relay, which opens ... drum roll ... the physical lock. So the old, mechanical lock vulnerabilities are preserved, and new electronic ones added on top. What could posibly go wrong?
      - QSIITurbo 13y ago
        "mechanical lock vulnerabilities are preserved" I've never been to a hotel that uses an ordinary key since those can be easily replicated, so that point is moot: all the electronic locks (most common these days) already have this "vulnerability" ("so why put a lock there in the first place?"). Second, since this system is being developed to use a smartphone, the security is easier to manage than a PIN code (such as 000000...). One can use centralised key-servers, etc. Third, the company making these locks (the physical part) is ASSA Abloy, which is an extremely reputable lock company instead of the one in your link.

VLM 13y ago

Just place a "special" charger in the lobby that charges, but also powns the phone and gathers not just all their precious data but gains access to their room. They might not have much to steal, but you'll know there's at least a phone to take. My guess is because none of they crypto is mentioned, its probably some self developed snakeoil, so you might not even need to own their phone. Could be as simple as "bluetooth address whatever, which happens to be in the central DB whitelist, says open sesame" and the door opens. Amusingly I have a moto-X and my BT addrs is 1 less than my wifi MAC so if the security protocol is weak enough to depend on BT addrs, you could sniff the wireless for awhile and then just subtract 1 from each sniffed wifi MAC and have some fun with known good BT addrs. Or perhaps on other phones BT addrs = wifi + 1 instead of minus 1. Whatever.

blueskin_ 13y ago
>Just place a "special" charger in the lobby Now this idea, I like. http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/08/beware-of-juice-jacking/ http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/08/beware-of-juice-jacking/ >My guess is because none of they crypto is mentioned, its probably some self developed snakeoil, so you might not even need to own their phone. Could be as simple as "bluetooth address whatever, which happens to be in the central DB whitelist, says open sesame" and the door opens. I would seriously hope for this not to be true, but I've seen too many security fails to think it won't. Access is amazingly rubbish with security, especially when some RFID chip makers actually put a proprietary encryption algorithm as a selling point, when many of those (e.g. mifare) are provably broken.

k-mcgrady 13y ago

>> This is a complete privacy and security nightmare both from the potential of cracking it and from installing an app that will probably grab every permission it can. Aren't hotel room locks already easily cracked? I remember seeing it on HN last year. As for permissions - if you don't like them don't install the app, they aren't going to deny you a key. >> It's also going to be entertaining seeing people with dead batteries begging a charge from people in the lobby. Presumably in this case they would give you a key.

blueskin_ 13y ago
>Aren't hotel room locks already easily cracked? They are, but this will only make them worse.
- lordCarbonFiber 13y ago
  There is no reason to believe that an nfc controled lock is any less secure than a traditional physical tumbler lock. In fact, if set up correctly (well sealed pannel, sound generation of keys, etc), it could be significantly more secure since well set up cryptography is a hell of a lot harder than simple lock picking.
  - Piskvorrr 13y ago
    That's a big "if". Big enough to be implausible - even nuclear missiles were sitting in the silos for years with launch code set to "000000"; what makes you think that hotels will care more about their security? See e.g. this: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/08/hotel_door_lock.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/08/hotel_door_lo... Moreover, the electronic mechanism pretty much never opens the lock: it activates a relay, which opens ... drum roll ... the physical lock. So the old, mechanical lock vulnerabilities are preserved, and new electronic ones added on top. What could posibly go wrong?
    - QSIITurbo 13y ago
      "mechanical lock vulnerabilities are preserved" I've never been to a hotel that uses an ordinary key since those can be easily replicated, so that point is moot: all the electronic locks (most common these days) already have this "vulnerability" ("so why put a lock there in the first place?"). Second, since this system is being developed to use a smartphone, the security is easier to manage than a PIN code (such as 000000...). One can use centralised key-servers, etc. Third, the company making these locks (the physical part) is ASSA Abloy, which is an extremely reputable lock company instead of the one in your link.