Key fobs at risk
Charles Parker, II
#
A decade ago, breaking into a vehicle was a relatively easy
manual process. As technology improved, there was an increase in the technology
implemented in the vehicle. We are to the point where the vehicle is a computer
on wheels. This will even be more the case once automotive ethernet is
implemented through the vehicle manufacturers.
To remove the opportunity for the theft a new technology was
placed in the vehicle-the immobilizers. This reduced the number of key fob
attacks by removing relay attacks from the attack surface. These required the
attacker to be within the range of the original key.
Cryptography Applied
to the Key Fob
The key fobs added a cryptographic function to the unlocking
device. The attacker could not simply sniff the key fob communicating with the
vehicle and replay the signal to break into the vehicle. The cryptographic
function instead worked to scramble the key fob communication.
New Attack
The attack-defense cycle was at work here. The defense (the
manufacturer) created a cybersecurity feature to stop the attacks. The
attackers viewed this, reverse engineered the process, and created a new attack
circumventing the cybersecurity feature. This instance was no different. The
attackers grasped the idea of breaking through the feature with the key fobs,
researched the idea, and reverse-engineered the process.
The researchers purchased a few immobilizer electronic
control units from eBay. With these secured, the researchers were able to
reverse engineer the firmware located within the key fobs. The purpose of
this was to analyze the method of communication between the key fob and
vehicle.
The analysis indicated the key used was very easy to crack.
This used Texas Instruments DST80 encryption to secure communication. This
normally would not be a significant detriment; however, the manufacturer’s
implementation was the issue. For instance, the Toyota implementation was based
on the serial number. What made this worse was if someone were to scan this
with an RFID reader, it showed the serial number. This portion of the research
was not difficult to complete. The RFID readers are for sale on Amazon for
under $30. Working with these is not complicated.
Another example involved Kia and Hyundai. These
manufacturers used 24 bits of random character rather than the 80 bits the
DST80 offers. To put this in perspective the 24 bits used could be cracked with
a laptop in a few milliseconds. Unfortunately, the rationale for not using the
greater number of bits is unknown. Perhaps this was for a cost or processing time
savings.
With either attack, once you have the cryptographic key, unlocking
the vehicle and doing as you wish is not a far stretch of the imagination. The
only other addition to the attack is the person needs to be able to turn the
ignition. This may be bypassed using old-school technology (e.g. screwdriver or
hot-wiring).
This was a rather significant decrease in cybersecurity
applied to the key fob-vehicle communication process. This is much like
cybersecurity retreating to the 1980s.
Application
This serious vulnerability is not applicable to all the
models for the three automakers. This issue is applicable to older models.
While this is positive, this still has the other vehicles at risk of theft
and other malicious actions.
This does, however, affect many models. To show the extent,
following is the listing:
Toyota Auris 2009-2013
Camry 2010-2013
Corolla 2010-2014
FJ
Cruiser 2011-2016
Fortuner 2009-2015
Hiace 2010+
Highlander
2008-2013
Land
Cruiser 2009-2015
RAV4 2011-2012
Urban
Cruiser 2010-2014
Yaris
2011-2013
Kia Ceed 2012+
Carens 2014
Rio 2011-2017
Soul
2013+
Optima 2013-2015
Picanto 2011+
Hyundai I10 2008+
I20 2009+
Veloster 2010+
IX20 2016
I40
2013
What did we learn?
Over time, security should improve. The attackers are not
limiting their attacks or type of technology used for the attacks. They
certainly are not moving backward in their attack plans. For the cryptography
to be used in the format as it was is not appropriate. The cybersecurity needs
to be at least matched, however, it should be optimized against the known and
future attacks. This is done through testing and forward-looking cybersecurity
architecture.
Cybersecurity needs to be built into the product from the
beginning of the project. With this in place, the project’s timeline and costs are
kept inline. Having to re-engineer, approve, and retrain staff is a costly
venture.
Resources
Ansari, U. (2020, March 6). Poor car keys encryption: Hackers
can clone millions of toyota, kia and Hyundai keys. Retrieved from https://www.carspiritpk.com/2020/03/poor-car-keys-encryption-hackers-can-clone-millions-of-toyota-kia-and-hyundai-keys/
E&T. (2020, March 6). Millions of cars’ anti-theft
systems vulnerable to hacking. Retrieved from https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2020/03/millions-of-cars-anti-theft-systems-vulnerable-to-hacking/
Greenberg, A. (2020, March 5). Hackers can clone millions of
toyota, Hyundai, and kia keys. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/story/hackers-can-clone-millions-of-toyota-hyundai-kia-keys/
Greenberg, A. (2020, March 7). Hackers can clone millions of
toyota, Hyundai, and kia keys. Retrieved from https://arstechnica.com/cars/2020/03/hackers-can-clone-millions-of-toyota-hyundai-and-kia-keys/?comments=1
McClain, S. (2020, March 7). Hackers can clone millions of
toyota, Hyundai, and kia keys. Retrieved from https://mashviral.com/hackers-can-clone-millions-of-toyota-hyundai-and-kia-keys/
McKay, T. (2020, March 5). Encryption flaws leave millions
of toyota, kia, and Hyundai cars vulnerable to key cloning. Retrieved from https://gizmodo.com/encryption-flaws-leave-millions-of-toyota-kia-and-hyu-1842132716
Whazup. (2020, March 7). Hackers can clone millions of
toyota, Hyundai, and kia keys. Retrieved from https://www.wazupnaija.com/hackers-can-clone-millions-of-toyota-hyundai-and-kia-keys/
Wouters, L, Van den Herrewegen, J., Garcia, F.D., Oswald,
D., Gierlichs, B., & Prencel, B. (2020). Dismantling DST80-based
immobilizer systems. IACR Transactions on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded
Systems, 2020(2), 99-127. Doi:10.13154/tches.v2020.12.99-127
No comments:
Post a Comment