• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 52 subscribers
  • Views 987 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Original question:

Industry news on potential Bluetooth vulnerabilities

CC2640: CC2640 and Bluetooth qualification

Niklas Parnesten
Prodigy 25 points
Part Number: CC2640

Hi!

Working with Bluetooth qualification of a BLE module:

We base our qualification on the TI qualified design QDID 82185 but some inconsistences occur in the Bluetooth launch studio:

There are the following ICS inconsistencies because the QDID 82185 was tested on TCRL 2015-2 and our project is created in the current TCRL 2018-1:

 

  • The first inconsistency is if the Core Specification Supplement 7 is supported or not
  • The second and third are required if “LE Ping” is supported.
  • The two last ones are related to the Erratum 10734 that it is mandatory from TCRL 2018-1.

Any ideas how to handle this in our qualification?

Thanks!

Niklas

  • 0
    TI__Guru** 106705 points
    Hi Niklas,

    We are looking into your questions and will get back to you.

    Regards,
    Fredrik
  • 0 in reply to Fredrik K
    TI__Guru** 106705 points
    Hi Niklas,

    I have forwarded this to our stack developers and they are looking into it.

    Are you using a BQC (bluetooth Qualification Consultant) for the qualification?

    Also, are you running BLE Stack 2.2.2 for CC2640 or BLE SDK 2.20 for CC2640R2F to include the fix for this potential vulnerability: e2e.ti.com/.../713044 ?

    Regards,
    Fredrik
  • 0 in reply to Fredrik K
    Prodigy 25 points

    Hi Fredrik,

    Yes, we are using a BQC.

    And we are running BLE Stack 2.2.2 for CC2640.

    Regards,

    Niklas

  • 0 in reply to Niklas Parnesten
    TI__Guru** 106705 points
    Hi Niklas,

    All good on that end then!

    I will let you know when I hear back from the stack team.

    Regards,
    Fredrik
  • 0 in reply to Niklas Parnesten
    TI__Guru** 105180 points

    Hello Niklas,

    After consulting with our BQC, you can make the following changes to resolve the Bluetooth Launch Studio (BLS) consistency check failures with your End Product Listing when referencing TI's QDID 82185.

    1. To resolve the inconsistency with Core Specification Supplement 7, deselect GAP 8a/17 and 20a/17 provided you are not using AD Type URI in your ADV data. None of the TI examples use this AD Type, so you would've added it if it's in your application. 

    2. To resolve the HCI inconsistencies with LE Ping, deselect "4.0HCI" in the Layers section since this Layer is not applicable to End Product Listings

    3. Since you are using an updated SDK which incorporates LESC Pairing Erratum 10734, you can select the related SUM ICS 21/17 and 34/13. A list of updated SDKs can be found in this post.

    The above modifications to your BLS project should resolve the consistency check failures listed above. Please let us know if you encounter any issues.

    Best wishes