Skip to content

Zero-day: Bluetooth gap turns millions of headphones into listening stations

Technology
123 88 679
  • The Bluetooth chipset installed in popular models from major manufacturers is vulnerable. Hackers could use it to initiate calls and eavesdrop on devices.

    Source

  • The Bluetooth chipset installed in popular models from major manufacturers is vulnerable. Hackers could use it to initiate calls and eavesdrop on devices.

    Source

    So how do you determine if your headphones have the vulnerable chip in them?

  • So how do you determine if your headphones have the vulnerable chip in them?

    You will need to do some research on your headphones, I guess.

  • The Bluetooth chipset installed in popular models from major manufacturers is vulnerable. Hackers could use it to initiate calls and eavesdrop on devices.

    Source

    Every spy in my vicinity is going to be dancing to The Meters - Cissy Strut.

  • So how do you determine if your headphones have the vulnerable chip in them?

    The flaws, discovered by German cybersecurity firm ERNW and first reported by Heise Online, affect dozens of headphone models from brands such as Sony, JBL, Bose, and Marshall, with no comprehensive firmware fixes available yet.

    • Sony WH-1000XM4/5/6, WF-1000XM3/4/5, LinkBuds S, ULT Wear, CH-720N, C500, C510-GFP, XB910N
    • Marshall ACTON III, MAJOR V, MINOR IV, MOTIF II, STANMORE III, WOBURN III
    • JBL Live Buds 3, Endurance Race 2
    • Jabra Elite 8 Active
    • Bose QuietComfort Earbuds
    • Beyerdynamic Amiron 300
    • Jlab Epic Air Sport ANC
    • Teufel Airy TWS 2
    • MoerLabs EchoBeatz
    • Xiaomi Redmi Buds 5 Pro
    • earisMax Bluetooth Auracast Sender

    ERNW emphasizes that this is only a partial list.

    Source

  • The Bluetooth chipset installed in popular models from major manufacturers is vulnerable. Hackers could use it to initiate calls and eavesdrop on devices.

    Source

    And this is why people wanted headphone jacks... and also why corporations didn't want them.

  • So how do you determine if your headphones have the vulnerable chip in them?

    According to the article, headphones using a Bluetooth SoC manufactured by Airoha may be vulnerable. So, need to find if your headphones use their SoC.

  • And this is why people wanted headphone jacks... and also why corporations didn't want them.

    and also why corporations didn't want them.

    Exactly! So they can spy on us more!

  • The Bluetooth chipset installed in popular models from major manufacturers is vulnerable. Hackers could use it to initiate calls and eavesdrop on devices.

    Source

    Gonna set up my tablet to play Capital over bluetooth 24/7. Enjoy the theory skinwalkers

  • The flaws, discovered by German cybersecurity firm ERNW and first reported by Heise Online, affect dozens of headphone models from brands such as Sony, JBL, Bose, and Marshall, with no comprehensive firmware fixes available yet.

    • Sony WH-1000XM4/5/6, WF-1000XM3/4/5, LinkBuds S, ULT Wear, CH-720N, C500, C510-GFP, XB910N
    • Marshall ACTON III, MAJOR V, MINOR IV, MOTIF II, STANMORE III, WOBURN III
    • JBL Live Buds 3, Endurance Race 2
    • Jabra Elite 8 Active
    • Bose QuietComfort Earbuds
    • Beyerdynamic Amiron 300
    • Jlab Epic Air Sport ANC
    • Teufel Airy TWS 2
    • MoerLabs EchoBeatz
    • Xiaomi Redmi Buds 5 Pro
    • earisMax Bluetooth Auracast Sender

    ERNW emphasizes that this is only a partial list.

    Source

    Sony WH-1000XM4/5/6

    I don't have one of those, but they're pretty popular as headphones with good ANC.

    Jlab Epic Air Sport ANC

    I do have those, though.

  • Every spy in my vicinity is going to be dancing to The Meters - Cissy Strut.

    A fine choice though.

  • The Bluetooth chipset installed in popular models from major manufacturers is vulnerable. Hackers could use it to initiate calls and eavesdrop on devices.

    Source

    Even if these attacks seem frightening on paper, the ERNW researchers are reassuring: many conditions must be met to carry out an eavesdropping attack. First and foremost, the attacker(s) must be within range of the Bluetooth short-range radio; an attack via the Internet is not possible. They must also carry out several technical steps without attracting attention. And they must have a reason to eavesdrop on the Bluetooth connection, which, according to the discoverers, is only conceivable for a few target people. For example, celebrities, journalists or diplomats, but also political dissidents and employees in security-critical companies are possible targets.

    I guess they didn’t point this out because it’s kind of obvious, but it sounds like they also have to actually be on to be exploited. So it’s not going to turn on and start listening to you at least. Definitely concerning, but I’m still gonna be listening to my audio books and podcasts with my wireless headphones.

  • The Bluetooth chipset installed in popular models from major manufacturers is vulnerable. Hackers could use it to initiate calls and eavesdrop on devices.

    Source

    There's lots of money to be made by inserting a hardware back door in your product then later disclosing it as an unfixable vulnerability and force your customers to buy new hardware which has the same but different backdoor. Repeat.

  • And this is why people wanted headphone jacks... and also why corporations didn't want them.

    I mean, there were legitimate technical issues with the standard, especially on smartphones, which is where they really got pushed out. Most other devices do have headphones jacks. If I get a laptop, it's probably got a headphones jack. Radios will have headphones jacks. Get a mixer, it's got a headphones jack. I don't think that the standard is going to vanish anytime soon in general.

    I like headphones jacks. I have a ton of 1/8" and 1/4" devices and headphones that I happily use. But they weren't doing it for no reason.

    • From what I've read, the big, driving one that drove them out on smartphones was that the jack just takes up a lot more physical space in the phone than USB-C or Bluetooth. I'd rather just have a thicker phone, but a lot of people don't, and if you're going all over the phone trying to figure out what to eject to buy more space, that's gonna be a big target. For people who do want a jack on smartphones, which invariably have USB-C, you can get a similar effect to having a headphones jack by just leaving a small USB-C audio interface with a headphones jack on the end of your headphones (one with a passthrough USB-C port if you also want to use a USB-C port for other things).

    • A second issue was that the standard didn't have a way to provide power (there was a now-dead extension from many years back that is now dead, IIRC for MD players, that let a small amount of power be provided with an extra ring). That didn't matter for a long time, as long as your device could put out a strong enough signal to drive headphones of whatever impedance you had. But ANC has started to become popular now, and you need power for ANC. This is really the first time I think that there's a solid reason to want to power headphones.

    • The connection got shorted when plugging things in and out, which could result in loud sound on the membrane.

    • USB-C is designed so that the springy tensioning stuff that's there to keep the connection solid is on the (cheap, easy to replace) cord rather than the (expensive, hard to replace) device; I understand from past reading that this was a major reason that micro-USB replaced mini-USB. Instead of your device wearing out, the cord wears out. Not as much of an issue for headphones as mini-USB, but I think that it's probably fair to say that it's desirable to have the tensioning on the cord side.

    • On USB-C, the right part breaks. One irritation I have with USB-C is that it is...kind of flimsy. Like, it doesn't require that much force pushing on a plug sideways to damage a plug. However --- and I don't know if this was a design goal for USB-C, though I suspect it was --- my experience has been that if that happens, it's the plug on the (cheap, easy to replace) cord that gets damaged, not the device. I have a television with a headphones jack that I destroyed by tripping over a headphones cord once, because the headphones jack was nice and durable and let me tear components inside the television off. I've damaged several USB-C cables, but I've never damaged the device they're connected to while doing so.

    On an interesting note, the standard is extremely old, probably one of the oldest data standards in general use today; the 1/4" mono standard was from phone switchboards in the 1800s.

    EDIT: Also, one other perk of using USB-C instead of a built-in headphones jack on a smartphone is that if the DAC on your phone sucks, going the USB-C-audio-interface route means that you can use a different DAC. Can't really change the internal DAC. I don't know about other people, but last phone I had that did have an audio jack would let through a "wub wub wub" sound when I was charging it on USB off my car's 12V cigarette lighter adapter --- dirty power, but USB power is often really dirty. Was really obnoxious when feeding my car's stereo via its AUX port. That's very much fixable by putting some filtering on the DAC's power supply, maybe needs a capacitor on the thing, but the phone manufacturer didn't do it, maybe to save space or money. That's not something that I can go fix. I eventually worked around it by getting a battery-powered Bluetooth receiver that had a 1/8" headphones jack, cutting the phone's DAC out of the equation. The phone's internal DAC worked fine when the phone wasn't charging, but I wanted to have the phone plugged in for navigation stuff when I was driving.

  • Even if these attacks seem frightening on paper, the ERNW researchers are reassuring: many conditions must be met to carry out an eavesdropping attack. First and foremost, the attacker(s) must be within range of the Bluetooth short-range radio; an attack via the Internet is not possible. They must also carry out several technical steps without attracting attention. And they must have a reason to eavesdrop on the Bluetooth connection, which, according to the discoverers, is only conceivable for a few target people. For example, celebrities, journalists or diplomats, but also political dissidents and employees in security-critical companies are possible targets.

    I guess they didn’t point this out because it’s kind of obvious, but it sounds like they also have to actually be on to be exploited. So it’s not going to turn on and start listening to you at least. Definitely concerning, but I’m still gonna be listening to my audio books and podcasts with my wireless headphones.

    A speaker i have from bose is always on and "sleeping" and can be connected to from the phone no matter what i do, drains the fucking battery and when i want to use it finaly its dead.. wouldnt be surprised if some headphones worked the same..

  • A speaker i have from bose is always on and "sleeping" and can be connected to from the phone no matter what i do, drains the fucking battery and when i want to use it finaly its dead.. wouldnt be surprised if some headphones worked the same..

    It sounds like they have some kind of wake function that it’s always listening for? I don’t think that’s a common feature in headphones just because of the battery drain, but they’re always chucking useless features on electronics so I’m sure some are floating around out there. I doubt it’s something you wouldn’t know about unless they were secondhand, though.

  • And this is why people wanted headphone jacks... and also why corporations didn't want them.

  • The Bluetooth chipset installed in popular models from major manufacturers is vulnerable. Hackers could use it to initiate calls and eavesdrop on devices.

    Source

    This is why I chose to get a Corsair Virtuoso, which has a removable microphone.

  • The flaws, discovered by German cybersecurity firm ERNW and first reported by Heise Online, affect dozens of headphone models from brands such as Sony, JBL, Bose, and Marshall, with no comprehensive firmware fixes available yet.

    • Sony WH-1000XM4/5/6, WF-1000XM3/4/5, LinkBuds S, ULT Wear, CH-720N, C500, C510-GFP, XB910N
    • Marshall ACTON III, MAJOR V, MINOR IV, MOTIF II, STANMORE III, WOBURN III
    • JBL Live Buds 3, Endurance Race 2
    • Jabra Elite 8 Active
    • Bose QuietComfort Earbuds
    • Beyerdynamic Amiron 300
    • Jlab Epic Air Sport ANC
    • Teufel Airy TWS 2
    • MoerLabs EchoBeatz
    • Xiaomi Redmi Buds 5 Pro
    • earisMax Bluetooth Auracast Sender

    ERNW emphasizes that this is only a partial list.

    Source

    Damn that's pretty big, hopefully they update and give a final list of affected devices. Not to mention, gotta pray the devices will see software updates to try and mitigate it.

  • I mean, there were legitimate technical issues with the standard, especially on smartphones, which is where they really got pushed out. Most other devices do have headphones jacks. If I get a laptop, it's probably got a headphones jack. Radios will have headphones jacks. Get a mixer, it's got a headphones jack. I don't think that the standard is going to vanish anytime soon in general.

    I like headphones jacks. I have a ton of 1/8" and 1/4" devices and headphones that I happily use. But they weren't doing it for no reason.

    • From what I've read, the big, driving one that drove them out on smartphones was that the jack just takes up a lot more physical space in the phone than USB-C or Bluetooth. I'd rather just have a thicker phone, but a lot of people don't, and if you're going all over the phone trying to figure out what to eject to buy more space, that's gonna be a big target. For people who do want a jack on smartphones, which invariably have USB-C, you can get a similar effect to having a headphones jack by just leaving a small USB-C audio interface with a headphones jack on the end of your headphones (one with a passthrough USB-C port if you also want to use a USB-C port for other things).

    • A second issue was that the standard didn't have a way to provide power (there was a now-dead extension from many years back that is now dead, IIRC for MD players, that let a small amount of power be provided with an extra ring). That didn't matter for a long time, as long as your device could put out a strong enough signal to drive headphones of whatever impedance you had. But ANC has started to become popular now, and you need power for ANC. This is really the first time I think that there's a solid reason to want to power headphones.

    • The connection got shorted when plugging things in and out, which could result in loud sound on the membrane.

    • USB-C is designed so that the springy tensioning stuff that's there to keep the connection solid is on the (cheap, easy to replace) cord rather than the (expensive, hard to replace) device; I understand from past reading that this was a major reason that micro-USB replaced mini-USB. Instead of your device wearing out, the cord wears out. Not as much of an issue for headphones as mini-USB, but I think that it's probably fair to say that it's desirable to have the tensioning on the cord side.

    • On USB-C, the right part breaks. One irritation I have with USB-C is that it is...kind of flimsy. Like, it doesn't require that much force pushing on a plug sideways to damage a plug. However --- and I don't know if this was a design goal for USB-C, though I suspect it was --- my experience has been that if that happens, it's the plug on the (cheap, easy to replace) cord that gets damaged, not the device. I have a television with a headphones jack that I destroyed by tripping over a headphones cord once, because the headphones jack was nice and durable and let me tear components inside the television off. I've damaged several USB-C cables, but I've never damaged the device they're connected to while doing so.

    On an interesting note, the standard is extremely old, probably one of the oldest data standards in general use today; the 1/4" mono standard was from phone switchboards in the 1800s.

    EDIT: Also, one other perk of using USB-C instead of a built-in headphones jack on a smartphone is that if the DAC on your phone sucks, going the USB-C-audio-interface route means that you can use a different DAC. Can't really change the internal DAC. I don't know about other people, but last phone I had that did have an audio jack would let through a "wub wub wub" sound when I was charging it on USB off my car's 12V cigarette lighter adapter --- dirty power, but USB power is often really dirty. Was really obnoxious when feeding my car's stereo via its AUX port. That's very much fixable by putting some filtering on the DAC's power supply, maybe needs a capacitor on the thing, but the phone manufacturer didn't do it, maybe to save space or money. That's not something that I can go fix. I eventually worked around it by getting a battery-powered Bluetooth receiver that had a 1/8" headphones jack, cutting the phone's DAC out of the equation. The phone's internal DAC worked fine when the phone wasn't charging, but I wanted to have the phone plugged in for navigation stuff when I was driving.

    Great post, thank you.

  • 29 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • What is a Legal Hub? The Ultimate Guide for Corporate Legal Teams

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 38 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • How to "Reformat" a Hardrive the American way

    Technology technology
    25
    2
    90 Stimmen
    25 Beiträge
    133 Aufrufe
    T
    It really, really is. Like that scene from Office Space.
  • $20 for us citizens

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • My AI Skeptic Friends Are All Nuts

    Technology technology
    31
    1
    13 Stimmen
    31 Beiträge
    162 Aufrufe
    J
    I did read it, and my comment is exactly referencing the attitude of the author which is "It's good enough, so you should use it". I disagree, and say it's another dumbass shortcut to cash grab on a less than stellar ecosystem and product. It's training wheels for failure.
  • Google Shared My Phone Number!

    Technology technology
    45
    1
    145 Stimmen
    45 Beiträge
    178 Aufrufe
    M
    Italy, and all of Europe, have always had a greater respect for personal and a lesser respect for business' profits than the U.S.
  • Microsoft's AI Secretly Copying All Your Private Messages

    Technology technology
    4
    1
    0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    S
    Forgive me for not explaining better. Here are the terms potentially needing explanation. Provisioning in this case is initial system setup, the kind of stuff you would do manually after a fresh install, but usually implies a regimented and repeatable process. Virtual Machine (VM) snapshots are like a save state in a game, and are often used to reset a virtual machine to a particular known-working condition. Preboot Execution Environment (PXE, aka ‘network boot’) is a network adapter feature that lets you boot a physical machine from a hosted network image rather than the usual installation on locally attached storage. It’s probably tucked away in your BIOS settings, but many computers have the feature since it’s a common requirement in commercial deployments. As with the VM snapshot described above, a PXE image is typically a known-working state that resets on each boot. Non-virtualized means not using hardware virtualization, and I meant specifically not running inside a virtual machine. Local-only means without a network or just not booting from a network-hosted image. Telemetry refers to data collecting functionality. Most software has it. Windows has a lot. Telemetry isn’t necessarily bad since it can, for example, help reveal and resolve bugs and usability problems, but it is easily (and has often been) abused by data-hungry corporations like MS, so disabling it is an advisable precaution. MS = Microsoft OSS = Open Source Software Group policies are administrative settings in Windows that control standards (for stuff like security, power management, licensing, file system and settings access, etc.) for user groups on a machine or network. Most users stick with the defaults but you can edit these yourself for a greater degree of control. Docker lets you run software inside “containers” to isolate them from the rest of the environment, exposing and/or virtualizing just the resources they need to run, and Compose is a related tool for defining one or more of these containers, how they interact, etc. To my knowledge there is no one-to-one equivalent for Windows. Obviously, many of these concepts relate to IT work, as are the use-cases I had in mind, but the software is simple enough for the average user if you just pick one of the premade playbooks. (The Atlas playbook is popular among gamers, for example.) Edit: added explanations for docker and telemetry