Well... Shit.
There are so, so, so, many ESP32's in not just my house, but practically everyone I know.
There outta be fines for this BS.
this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2025
1023 points (92.8% liked)
Technology
65389 readers
4271 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
1023
Undocumented Commands Found In Bluetooth Chip Manufactured in China Used By a Billion Devices.
(www.tarlogic.com)
Source Link Privacy.
Tarlogic Security has detected a backdoor in the ESP32, a microcontroller that enables WiFi and Bluetooth connection and is present in millions of mass-market IoT devices. Exploitation of this backdoor would allow hostile actors to conduct impersonation attacks and permanently infect sensitive devices such as mobile phones, computers, smart locks or medical equipment by bypassing code audit controls.
Update: The ESP32 "backdoor" that wasn't.
You're fine. This isn't something that can be exploited over wifi. You literally need physical access to the device to exploit it as it's commands over USB that allow flashing the chip.
This is a security firm making everything sound scary because they want you to buy their testing device.
You literally need physical access to the device to exploit it
You don't need physical access. Read the article. The researcher used physical USB to discover that the Bluetooth firmware has backdoors. It doesn't require physical access to exploit.
It's Bluetooth that's vulnerable.
I just re-read the article and yes, you still need physical access.
The exploit is one that bypasses OS protections to writing to the firmware. In otherwords, you need to get the device to run a malicious piece of code or exploit a vulnerability in already running code that also interacts with the bluetooth stack.
The exploit, explicitly, is not one that can be carried out with a drive-by Bluetooth connection. You also need faulty software running on the device.
"Depending on how Bluetooth stacks handle HCI commands on the device, remote exploitation of the backdoor might be possible via malicious firmware or rogue Bluetooth connections."
I of course don't know details but I'm basing my post on that sentence. "Backdoor may be possible via ... rogue Bluetooth connections."
Looking at the article, the exploit requires you to be able to send arbitrary data to the Bluetooth device over a physical connection. This means that a properly secure application will be protected from drive by connections, but if the application has an exploit that either lets an attacker write arbitrary values to the Bluetooth controller, or more likely contains a general arbitrary code execution exploit, then you could use this to rewrite values to the chip that would let you "persist" certain changes to the Bluetooth chip that would be difficult to notice.
I would consider this a moderate concern, as this will definitely increase your options if you're looking to be able to make an attack that targets a specific device and this gives you a few additional persistence options, but any attack would have to be designed for a particular program running connected to a Bluetooth chip.
A more likely concern in my opinion would be the possibility of a supply chain attack, where someone compromises a Bluetooth chip that they know will be used to construct a particular part.
I don't think that it's super likely that either of these will affect the average person, only corporations and governments where espionage is an actual threat, as if you can find a Bluetooth IOT device that you want to mess with, like a Bluetooth enabled door lock, then you're more likely to be able to find an arbitrary code execution attack which causes it to unlock immediately. Being able to spoof a different Bluetooth device isn't likely to give you that big of an advantage when you're working with a device that was already vulnerable for a different reason.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Depending on how Bluetooth stacks handle HCI commands on the device, remote exploitation of the backdoor might be possible via malicious firmware or rogue Bluetooth connections.
I really wish these articles just tell us what these scenarios are. I understand companies need publicity or need to sell software but if it isn't replicatable and the article says "might be possible" it kind of sounds like a secuity sales pitch.
This is especially the case if an attacker already has root access, planted malware, or pushed a malicious update on the device that opens up low-level access.
This part basically sounds more like a software issue where the attacker has a way in already. The system is already vulernable at this point before using the exploit found.
I don't think there's enough information out yet.
It is very interesting though.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I do have a few outside. Probably not the best security-wise. Haha. Those are the first to get patched when one comes out.
Security wise, unless you are being specifically targeted by someone, you are almost certainly fine. And if you are being specifically targeted, I think someone hacking your ESPs is the least of your worries. A malicious attacker that knows your physical location can do a lot more scary things than just spying through ESPs.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(12 replies)
We really should be pushing for fully open source stack (firmware, os) in all iot devices. They are not very complicated so this should be entirely possible. Probably will need a EU law though.
I 100% believe firmware should be open source no question about it. There's so many devices out there especially phones and iot devices that just become e-waste because you can't do anything with it once it's not supported if it was open source and documented in some way then it could be used. I have like five cheap phones that I got because they were so cheap but once they lost support they've become completely useless even though they still work.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Open source stack will not prevent this. It's not even a backdoor, it's functionality that these researches think should be hidden from programmers for whatever reason.
Open source devices would have this functionality readily available for programmers. Look at rtl-sdr, using the words of these researches, it has a "backdoor" where a TV dongle may be used to listen to garage key fobs gasp everyone panic now!
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I hate it when an attacker who already has root access to my device gets sightly more access to the firmware. Definitely spin up a website and a logo, maybe a post in Bloomberg.
Too much fanfare and too little real info shared to be of any value. Sounds more like an ad than infosec
load more comments
(2 replies)
This sounds like there are some undocumented opcodes on the HCI side -- the Host Computer Interface -- not the wireless side. By itself, it's not that big a deal. If someone can prove that there's some sort of custom BLE packet that gives access to those HCI opcodes wirelessly, I'd be REALLY concerned.
But if it's just on the host side, you can only get to it if you've cracked the box and have access to the wiring. If someone has that kind of access, they're likely to be able to flash their own firmware and take over the whole device anyway.
Not sure this disclosure increases the risk any. I wouldn't start panicking.
load more comments
(8 replies)
This isn't a backdoor. Just a company trying to make a name for themselves by sensationalizing a much smaller discovery.
Seriously this. Every single IC which has digital logic contains some number of undocumented test commands used to ensure it meets all the required specifications during production. They're not intended to be used for normal operation and almost never included in datasheets.
If anyone's ever followed console emulator development, they know those undocumented commands are everywhere. There's still people finding new ones for the N64 hardware
Edit: I should say undocumented behavior, not necessarily new commands
The other day someone posted in Canada community that Canada should stop using Tesla cars and import Chinese cars. I replied saying, “That’s like replacing one evil with another.” I was downvoted by a lot of people. I should’ve expected it cuz a lot of people have short term memory.
Because that's not about privacy, that's about the trade war. Retaliatory tariffs on US cars increase cost of cars for Canadians, as there are almost no car assembled in Canada. Reducing or eliminating tariffs on cars from China would lower cost of new cars for Canadians while keeping the tariffs up.
For privacy and security, not a single new car on the market is decent right now. That should be regulated, but that's no concern for any politician at the moment.
Europe and its 50 car makers could also be considered instead of China..
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
There's been a lot of that lately. Same here in New Zealand.
You dipshits, they're both the bad guys now.
load more comments
(13 replies)
I’d like to know if this is just a firmware update or unfixable, but sadly this seems just an ad rather than news
Here’s an article with a bit more detail… but I’m still unclear whether these backdoor commands are hardware circuits or firmware logic.
Bleeping Computer: Undocumented "backdoor" found in Bluetooth chip used by a billion devices
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Weird that they removed the reference to ESP32, one of the most common and widely known microcontrollers, from the headline.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The Chinese adding back doors into their software/hardware.
Say it ain't so!
Say it ain't so
Your bug is a heartbleeder
Say it ain't so
My NIC is a bytetaker
load more comments
(12 replies)
The rebuttal wasn't as comforting as some are making it out to be. They seem to be more interested in the semantics of it not being a backdoor tied to a specific product, which appears to be true.
Rather it is a potential for vulnerability that exists in all wireless implementation, which seems to me to be a bigger issue.
load more comments
(5 replies)
One more reason to have actual open-source drivers instead of binary blobs..
Fukin dmnit! I just spent the last several months fine tuning a PCB design supporting this platform. I have , what i believe to be my last iteration, being sent to fab now. I have to look i to this. My solution isnt using bluetooth, so i dont know if im vulnerable.
Its not a backdoor, you're most likely fine.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Not the first time a backdoor was found on Chinese made hardware and it won‘t be the last time. Decoupling can‘t happen quickly enough.
Which government's backdoors would you prefer?
"We know you have a choice in oppressive governments, so we appreciate you choosing ours."
None of them, that's why the only things in my house that connect to the internet are my computers, game consoles, and cell phone
load more comments
(11 replies)
True, but the ESP32 is used by a lot of devices. This backdoor is pretty huge in scope of devices impacted.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Does anyone know where it is that we can find these new commands? I have an esp32 dev kit just a few feet away from me as i read this. It might be interesting to know what these new product "features" are.
Gotta blame China to get upvoted on Lemmy.
Or use a precise title. It's not a backdoor or a "backdoor".
load more comments
(2 replies)
I couldn’t find a list of devices. Anyone else find one?
The article is talking about the Espressif ESP32 micro controller (has Wi-Fi/Classic Bluetooth/BLE).
I don't know if the variants of this chip also have the same vulnerability (my guess is yes). As someone who works on this chip, I'm interested in more discourse on this matter.
load more comments
(8 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
view more: next ›