> As of right now, I have been unable to connect to my Bluetooth device which > doesn't require a pin. (Me)
Apparently, I was using the wrong pin for my device. (0000 didn't work but 1234 did.) But still a feature to consider. Though, I do appreciate the security concerns this brings up. On Nov 24, 4:53 pm, Paul <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is the best forum to request such features. > > This would be a nice feature to have. I am also working with sensors > that transmit data via Bluetooth and the serial port profile. As of > right now, I have been unable to connect to my Bluetooth device which > doesn't require a pin. > > On Nov 12, 9:22 am, Nick Pelly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Sean Liao <[email protected]> wrote: > > > === copy and pasted === > > > We only auto-pair using 0000 when: > > > 1.) the remote device looks like a headset > > > 2.) the user initiated the connection request through Bluetooth Settings > > > > 2 questions to the above: > > > 1.) Do both conditions have to meet or either one? > > > Both. > > > > 2.) how to make the remote device looks like a headset? set the right > > > COD > > > or implement headset profile on the remote device? > > > Right now it is class of device. > > > > BTW, we use remote devices as some custom sensors. In deployment > > > environment, there could be a lot sensors, and they could get swap in and > > > out as well. And our mobile application has to run continuously in the > > > background without stopping. Our patented application has ported to > > > j2me, > > > .netcf, native C++ mobile applications and jailbroken iPhone. We are > > > hoping > > > to deploy it to Android phones. We are facing the same issue as > > > Blackberry, > > > and in the process of working with RIM to remove this Blackberry paring > > > requirement. > > > > Is there a official channel to request new features for next release? > > > Ok, I understand your use case now. Once we have some time on the current > > set of API's we might consider allowing unathenticated and unencrypted > > bluetooth connections for applications with BLUETOOTH_ADMIN permission. This > > is not a step we'd take lightly - we have to balance your desire for > > unencumbered Bluetooth connections with the users desire for privacy and > > security. > > > This is the best forum to request such features. > > > > Thanks again. > > > Sean > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Nick Pelly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Sean Liao <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >>> Thanks for the quick response. Having watching this topic for a long > > >>> time since 1.1, I just cannot help feeling a little down now. > > > >> I'm sure you'll recover. We're talking about one dialog in the case of > > >> connecting to a new device. > > > >>> Not trying to complain, I just want to make sure I did not miss > > >>> anything feature I can utilize. On top of my head, there was a > > >>> discussion mentioning that using a pre-canned "0000" pin code on > > >>> remote device to by pass the paring request. That doesn't go thru on > > >>> the current release either? > > > >> We only auto-pair using 0000 when: > > >> - the remote device looks like a headset > > >> - the user initiated the connection request through Bluetooth Settings > > > >>> If someone can confirm this, that will save me some bucks just to buy > > >>> one to try it out. > > > >>> Thanks in advance and really appreciate it. > > > >>> Best regards, > > >>> Sean > > > >>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Nick Pelly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Sean Liao <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> >> Do you mean that if the remote device doesn't require a pin, the > > >>> android > > >>> >> api will not be able to establish a connection to such remote > > >>> >> devices? > > > >>> > BluetoothSocket enforces pairing. You'll need to pair before the > > >>> connection > > >>> > can complete. > > > >>> >> Do I have an option to inject the paring key pragmatically if my appl > > >>> >> already know the pin code of the remote device? Or, if the remote > > >>> device > > >>> >> doesn't require pin code, new new bluetooth api will just connect > > >>> without > > >>> >> user intervention? > > > >>> > You'll need to pair before the connection can complete. You cannot > > >>> inject a > > >>> > pin code. > > > >>> >> The idea is that we want to have a background service running without > > >>> user > > >>> >> intervention. > > > >>> > Well the user only needs to pair once. If your remote device supports > > >>> > Bluetooth 2.1 then pairing is really easy - the user just hits 'Yes'. > > > >>> >> Please advise. > > >>> >> Sean > > >>> >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Nick Pelly <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Sean Liao <[email protected]> > > >>> >>> wrote: > > > >>> >>>> Hi, > > > >>> >>>> Before 2.0 released, there were some questions/discussions related > > >>> to > > >>> >>>> the Bluetooth security, i.e whether paring is required to establish > > >>> >>>> connection. > > > >>> >>>> Anyone know the answer or try it out already: Is paring > > >>> >>>> requirement > > >>> >>>> enforced in the new bluetooth api in SDK 2? Any public info > > >>> available > > >>> >>>> related to this topic? > > > >>> >>> Yes pairing is required. But the OS will handle this in the > > >>> background. > > >>> >>> For example, if you use BluetoothSocket and BluetoothServerSocket > > >>> >>> and > > >>> try > > >>> >>> to make an unpaired connection, the OS will provide notifications to > > >>> the > > >>> >>> user that pairing is required. Once they are paired the connection > > >>> will > > >>> >>> complete. You application does not need to handle pairing. > > > >>> >>>> Thanks in advance. > > >>> >>>> Sean -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
