Skip to content

BLE: Fix privacy and signing handling in Security Manager #13037

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jun 10, 2020

Conversation

paul-szczepanek-arm
Copy link
Member

@paul-szczepanek-arm paul-szczepanek-arm commented May 29, 2020

Summary of changes

This fixes handling of identity addresses when privacy is enabled by the ble security manager. A new call allows to retrieve peer identity address and local data is being stored in the db. It also fixes the initialisation of said identity address.

Impact of changes

Migration actions required

Documentation

none


Pull request type

[] Patch update (Bug fix / Target update / Docs update / Test update / Refactor)
[x] Feature update (New feature / Functionality change / New API)
[] Major update (Breaking change E.g. Return code change / API behaviour change)

Test results

[] No Tests required for this change (E.g docs only update)
[x] Covered by existing mbed-os tests (Greentea or Unittest)
[] Tests / results supplied as part of this PR

Reviewers

@pan-


@paul-szczepanek-arm paul-szczepanek-arm changed the title add local idenitty and and csrk to security database [BLE] Fix privacy and signing handling in Security Manager May 29, 2020
@ciarmcom ciarmcom requested review from pan- and a team May 29, 2020 17:00
@ciarmcom
Copy link
Member

@paul-szczepanek-arm, thank you for your changes.
@pan- @ARMmbed/mbed-os-pan @ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers please review.

Copy link
Member

@pan- pan- left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That is confusing, I review these changes in #13038. Anyway all good except it may not be the best thing to write the local sign counter whenever it is changed.

@paul-szczepanek-arm
Copy link
Member Author

That is confusing, I review these changes in #13038. Anyway all good except it may not be the best thing to write the local sign counter whenever it is changed.

I agree, it is not and I am not:
7441efa

@AGlass0fMilk
Copy link
Member

So, before this, enabling privacy did not actually change the advertised address of the device? What I was seeing in the past was the device would advertise that it was using a random resolvable address but it always had the same MAC address. This was causing pairing issues with non-Mbed-OS devices (ie: iOS and Android)

@0xc0170 0xc0170 changed the title [BLE] Fix privacy and signing handling in Security Manager BLE: Fix privacy and signing handling in Security Manager Jun 3, 2020
@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Jun 3, 2020

add local idenitty and and csrk to security database

`idenitty type in the first commit. Otherwise looks fine to me. I would add also this

This fixes handling of identity addresses when privacy is enabled by the ble security manager. A new call allows to retrieve peer identity address and local data is being stored in the db. It also fixes the initialisation of said identity address.

to the first commit.

@paul-szczepanek-arm
Copy link
Member Author

I have broken up commits into logical steps and expanded the commit messages

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Jun 9, 2020

Sorry for the delay in all these BLE fixes, all should get CI time today.

@mergify mergify bot added needs: CI and removed needs: review labels Jun 9, 2020
@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Jun 9, 2020

CI started

@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Jun 9, 2020

Test run: SUCCESS

Summary: 6 of 6 test jobs passed
Build number : 1
Build artifacts

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Jun 10, 2020

All green but the incorrect status reported from mergify makes it red. I'll merge as it can't be overwritten.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants