Le lun. 22 août 2022 à 11:07, Bastien Baranoff <bastienbaranoff(a)gmail.com>
a écrit :
To be more clear on what i do
https://imgur.com/Cl8eiy4
Next step is to crack Kc before T3210 ends (5s) and you have full
impersonnation ;)
Le lun. 22 août 2022 à 10:11, Tomcsanyi, Domonkos <domi(a)tomcsanyi.net> a
écrit :
> Hey,
>
> Could you elaborate a bit what is happenning on the video?
>
> Thanks
>
> Domonkos
>
> 21.08.2022 dátummal, 21:26 időpontban Bastien Baranoff <
> bastienbaranoff(a)gmail.com> írta:
>
>
> My Bad IT WORKS !!!!!
>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-fEFbX5QeE
>
> Le dim. 21 août 2022 à 16:18, Bastien Baranoff <bastienbaranoff(a)gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>
>> Hello I admit that I mess a little with my assertion... What I mean is
>> we have to begin by something like this, (which not work yet i don't know
>> why...)
>> Cause I inject the kc to the ms and answer withe the sres to the bts
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J40EAVK-LHI
>>
https://imgur.com/4PjzMjw
>>
https://imgur.com/qWGVmOk
>> if you want to help you have the procedure in YT description tnahk you
>> all
>>
>> Le jeu. 3 mars 2022 à 04:02, Mychaela Falconia <
>> mychaela.falconia(a)gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>>> Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
>>>
>>> > Networks and user equipment capable of UTRAN a.k.a. R99+ ("release
>>> 99"),
>>> > do use full Milenage AKA even on 2G networks.
>>>
>>> Important correction: "capable of UTRAN" and R99+ are NOT one and
the
>>> same. Consider an ME implementation with GSM-only radio (no UTRAN)
>>> that is made to R99 specs - there are several real-world examples of
>>> such, including Nokia C3-00 and TI's LoCosto chipset (not Calypso)
>>> with its corresponding TCS3.2 reference fw. Are such MEs required to
>>> support USIM protocol and 3G-style AKA? Answer given in 3GPP TS 33.102
>>> section 6.8.1.4: support for USIM-ME interface (and thus 3G AKA) on
>>> such MEs is optional ("may support") for R99 and Rel-4, and only
>>> becomes mandatory from Rel-5 onward.
>>>
>>> In real life: Nokia C3-00 supports USIM-ME interface, but TI's TCS3.2
>>> (LoCosto) fw does not, despite supporting R99 otherwise.
>>>
>>> > For pre-R99 MS on a UTRAN capable
>>> > network, the HLR and USIM may use the 3G key material as basis to
>>> generate
>>> > shorter authentication tokens -- this is not seen in practice at all
>>> these
>>> > days. It is reasonable to expect full Milenage Authentication and Key
>>> > Agreement everywhere.
>>>
>>> Consider this scenario:
>>>
>>> * The operator's network is predominantly 3G/4G/5G, with GERAN support
>>> only as legacy.
>>>
>>> * Operator-issued "SIM" cards are USIM/ISIM native, with GSM 11.11
SIM
>>> support only as a backward compatibility feature.
>>>
>>> * However, the human end user of the mobile service principally,
>>> philosophically and ideologically insists on using an ancient ME
>>> implementation that is not only limited to GSM/2G in terms of radio,
>>> but also does NOT speak UICC/USIM protocol, only speaks GSM 11.11
>>> protocol to the SIM.
>>>
>>> As you can surely tell, what I just outlined is my real, actual,
>>> everyday real-life use case. So what happens in *this* use case?
>>> Obviously the authentication mode can only be classic GSM, as the ME
>>> firmware doesn't speak anything else. The authentication command sent
>>> to the SIM is RUN GSM ALGO from GSM 11.11, the input is just RAND (no
>>> AUTN), and the response from SIM is 8 bytes of Kc + 4 bytes of SRES.
>>>
>>> But what does the (U)SIM actually do internally to produce this
>>> 2G-style Kc+SRES response? Prior to my most recent careful reading of
>>> 3GPP TS 33.102, I thought there were two possibilities:
>>>
>>> 1) I thought that dual-mode SIMs had the option of using different
>>> algorithms for 2G and 3G modes, i.e., some version of COMP128 for 2G
>>> and Milenage for 3G. I thought this possibility was valid because
>>> Sysmocom USIM/ISIM cards support such configuration, and it is my
>>> understanding that original sysmoUSIM-SJS1 cards were shipped with 2G
>>> algo set to COMP128v1 and 3G also set to Milenage.
>>>
>>> 2) The other possibility is for the (U)SIM (and HLR correspondingly)
>>> to have only 3G key material and Milenage internally, with 2G
>>> authentication requests returning the result of c2 and c3 conversion
>>> functions from 3GPP TS 33.102 section 6.8.1.2.
>>>
>>> Now my reading of 33.102 tells me that only option 2 out of the above
>>> is valid (see section 6.8.1.5), whereas option 1 appears to be
>>> disallowed. Considering the separation between HLR/AuC and MSC/VLR,
>>> I don't see any way for an operator to implement a scheme with COMP128
>>> for 2G and Milenage for 3G: if MSC/VLR is 3G-aware, then whenever HLR
>>> supplies auth vectors to MSC/VLR, these vectors have to be quintets,
>>> and if the user's ME turns out to be a refusenik, then it is MSC/VLR
>>> and not HLR who gets to apply c2 and c3 conversion functions - hence
>>> there is no place for the operator to apply COMP128 for 2G mode.
>>>
>>> Two questions now:
>>>
>>> 1) Is my analysis above correct, or have I missed something or gone
>>> astray somewhere?
>>>
>>> 2) If my analysis is correct, then why did sysmoUSIM-SJS1 cards ship
>>> with the algorithm combination of COMP128v1 for 2G and Milenage for
>>> 3G? Isn't this combination invalid with regard to 3GPP architecture?
>>> And to make matters worse, some of those cards were sold at a cheaper
>>> price without ADM keys, making this factory configuration unchangeable.
>>> An invalid config that is also unchangeable??
>>>
>>> Just trying to understand...
>>>
>>> M~
>>>
>>