sorry https://imgur.com/a/sgaLLza
Le lun. 22 août 2022 à 11:07, Bastien Baranoff <bastienbaran...@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 <d...@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 < >> bastienbaran...@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 <bastienbaran...@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.falco...@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~ >>>> >>>
