% $Header: /cvsroot/latex-beamer/latex-beamer/solutions/conference-talks/conference-ornate-20min.en.tex,v 1.7 2007/01/28 20:48:23 tantau Exp $

\documentclass{beamer}

\usepackage{url}
\makeatletter
\def\url@leostyle{%
  \@ifundefined{selectfont}{\def\UrlFont{\sf}}{\def\UrlFont{\tiny\ttfamily}}}
\makeatother
%% Now actually use the newly defined style.
\urlstyle{leo}


% This file is a solution template for:

% - Talk at a conference/colloquium.
% - Talk length is about 20min.
% - Style is ornate.



% Copyright 2004 by Till Tantau <tantau@users.sourceforge.net>.
%
% In principle, this file can be redistributed and/or modified under
% the terms of the GNU Public License, version 2.
%
% However, this file is supposed to be a template to be modified
% for your own needs. For this reason, if you use this file as a
% template and not specifically distribute it as part of a another
% package/program, I grant the extra permission to freely copy and
% modify this file as you see fit and even to delete this copyright
% notice. 


\mode<presentation>
{
  \usetheme{Warsaw}
  % or ...

  \setbeamercovered{transparent}
  % or whatever (possibly just delete it)
}


\usepackage[english]{babel}
% or whatever

\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
% or whatever

\usepackage{times}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{subfigure}
\usepackage{hyperref}
% Or whatever. Note that the encoding and the font should match. If T1
% does not look nice, try deleting the line with the fontenc.


\title{Free Software GSM protocol stacks}

\subtitle
{OpenBSC, OsmoSGSN, OpenGGSN, OsmocomBB}

\author{Harald Welte}

\institute
{gnumonks.org\\gpl-violations.org\\OpenBSC\\airprobe.org\\hmw-consulting.de}
% - Use the \inst command only if there are several affiliations.
% - Keep it simple, no one is interested in your street address.

\date[ELCE 2010] % (optional, should be abbreviation of conference name)
{ELCE 2010, October 2010, Cambridge/UK}
% - Either use conference name or its abbreviation.
% - Not really informative to the audience, more for people (including
%   yourself) who are reading the slides online

\subject{GSM Security}
% This is only inserted into the PDF information catalog. Can be left
% out. 



% If you have a file called "university-logo-filename.xxx", where xxx
% is a graphic format that can be processed by latex or pdflatex,
% resp., then you can add a logo as follows:

% \pgfdeclareimage[height=0.5cm]{university-logo}{university-logo-filename}
% \logo{\pgfuseimage{university-logo}}



% Delete this, if you do not want the table of contents to pop up at
% the beginning of each subsection:
%\AtBeginSubsection[]
%{
%  \begin{frame}<beamer>{Outline}
%    \tableofcontents[currentsection,currentsubsection]
%  \end{frame}
%}


% If you wish to uncover everything in a step-wise fashion, uncomment
% the following command: 

%\beamerdefaultoverlayspecification{<+->}


\begin{document}

\begin{frame}
  \titlepage
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{Outline}
  \tableofcontents
  % You might wish to add the option [pausesections]
\end{frame}


% Structuring a talk is a difficult task and the following structure
% may not be suitable. Here are some rules that apply for this
% solution: 

% - Exactly two or three sections (other than the summary).
% - At *most* three subsections per section.
% - Talk about 30s to 2min per frame. So there should be between about
%   15 and 30 frames, all told.

% - A conference audience is likely to know very little of what you
%   are going to talk about. So *simplify*!
% - In a 20min talk, getting the main ideas across is hard
%   enough. Leave out details, even if it means being less precise than
%   you think necessary.
% - If you omit details that are vital to the proof/implementation,
%   just say so once. Everybody will be happy with that.

\begin{frame}{About the speaker}
\begin{itemize}
	\item Using + playing with Linux since 1994
	\item Kernel / bootloader / driver / firmware development since 1999
	\item IT security expert, focus on network protocol security
	\item Core developer of Linux packet filter netfilter/iptables 
	\item Board-level Electrical Engineering
	\item Always looking for interesting protocols (RFID, DECT, GSM)
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\section{GSM/3G security}

\begin{frame}{GSM/3G protocol security}
\begin{itemize}
	\item Observation
	\begin{itemize}
		\item Both GSM/3G and TCP/IP protocol specs are publicly available
		\item The Internet protocol stack (Ethernet/Wifi/TCP/IP) receives lots of scrutiny
		\item GSM networks are as widely deployed as the Internet
		\item Yet, GSM/3G protocols receive no such scrutiny!
	\end{itemize}
	\item There are reasons for that:
	\begin{itemize}
		\item GSM industry is extremely closed (and closed-minded)
		\item Only about 4 closed-source protocol stack implementations
		\item GSM chipset makers never release any hardware documentation
	\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\subsection{The closed GSM industry}

\begin{frame}{The closed GSM industry}{Handset manufacturing side}
\begin{itemize}
	\item Only very few companies build GSM/3.5G baseband chips today
	\begin{itemize}
		\item Those companies buy the operating system kernel and the protocol stack from third parties
	\end{itemize}
	\item Only very few handset makers are large enough to become a customer
	\begin{itemize}
		\item Even they only get limited access to hardware documentation
		\item Even they never really get access to the firmware source
	\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{The closed GSM industry}{Network manufacturing side}
\begin{itemize}
	\item Only very few companies build GSM network equipment
	\begin{itemize}
		\item Basically only Ericsson, Nokia-Siemens, Alcatel-Lucent and Huawei
		\item Exception: Small equipment manufacturers for picocell / nanocell / femtocells / measurement devices and law enforcement equipment
	\end{itemize}
	\item Only operators buy equipment from them
	\item Since the quantities are low, the prices are extremely high
	\begin{itemize}
		\item e.g. for a BTS, easily 10-40k EUR
	\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{The closed GSM industry}{Operator side}
\begin{itemize}
	\item Operators are mainly banks today
	\item Typical operator outsources
	\begin{itemize}
		\item Network planning / deployment / servicing
		\item Even Billing!
	\end{itemize}
	\item Operator just knows the closed equipment as shipped by manufacturer
	\item Very few people at an operator have knowledge of the protocol beyond what's needed for operations and maintenance
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{GSM is more than phone calls}
Listening to phone calls is boring...
\begin{itemize}
	\item Machine-to-Machine (M2M) communication
	\begin{itemize}
		\item BMW can unlock/open your car via GSM
		\item Alarm systems often report via GSM
		\item Smart Metering (Utility companies)
		\item GSM-R / European Train Control System
		\item Vending machines report that their cash box is full
		\item Control if wind-mills supply power into the grid
		\item Transaction numbers for electronic banking
	\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\subsection{Security implications}

\begin{frame}{The closed GSM industry}{Security implications}
The security implications of the closed GSM industry are:
\begin{itemize}
	\item Almost no people who have detailed technical knowledge outside the protocol stack or GSM network equipment manufacturers
	\item No independent research on protocol-level security
	\begin{itemize}
		\item If there's security research at all, then only theoretical (like the A5/2 and A5/1 cryptanalysis)
		\item Or on application level (e.g. mobile malware)
	\end{itemize}
	\item No open source protocol implementations
	\begin{itemize}
		\item which are key for making more people learn about the protocols
		\item which enable quick prototyping/testing by modifying existing code
	\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{The closed GSM industry}{My self-proclaimed mission}
Mission: Bring TCP/IP/Internet security knowledge to GSM
\begin{itemize}
	\item Create tools to enable independent/public IT Security community to examine GSM
	\item Try to close the estimated 10 year gap between the state of security technology on the Internet vs. GSM networks
	\begin{itemize}
		\item Industry thinks in terms of {\em walled garden} and {\em phones behaving like specified}
		\item No proper incident response strategies!
		\item No packet filters, firewalls, intrusion detection on GSM protocol level
		\item General public assumes GSM networks are safer than Internet
	\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{The closed GSM industry}{Areas of interest for Security research}
\begin{itemize}
	\item Specification problems
	\begin{itemize}
		\item Encryption optional, weak and only on the Um interface
		\item Lack of mutual authentication
		\item Silent calls for pin-pointing a phone
		\item RRLP and SUPL to obtain GPS coordinates of phone
	\end{itemize}
	\item Implementation problems
	\begin{itemize}
		\item TMSI information leak on network change
		\item TLV parsers that have never seen invalid packets
		\item Obscure options in spec lead to rarely-tested/used code paths
	\end{itemize}
	\item Operation problems
	\begin{itemize}
		\item VLR overflow leading to paging-by-IMSI
		\item TMSI re-allocation too infrequent
		\item Networks/Cells without frequency hopping
	\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{Security analysis of GSM}{How would you get started?}
If you were to start with GSM protocol level security analysis, where and
how would you start?
\begin{itemize}
	\item On the network side?
	\begin{itemize}
		\item Difficult since equipment is not easily available and normally extremely expensive
		\item However, network is very modular and has many standardized/documented interfaces
		\item Thus, if BTS equipment is available, much easier/faster progress
	\end{itemize}
	\item Result: Started project OpenBSC in 10/2008
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{Security analysis of GSM}{How would you get started?}
If you were to start with GSM protocol level security analysis, where and
how would you start?
\begin{itemize}
	\item On the handset side?
	\begin{itemize}
		\item Difficult since GSM firmware and protocol stacks are closed and proprietary
		\item Even if you want to write your own protocol stack, the layer 1 hardware and signal processing is closed and undocumented, too
		\item Publicly known attempts (12/2009)
		\begin{itemize}
			\item The TSM30 project as part of the THC GSM project
			\item mados, an alternative OS for Nokia DTC3 phones
		\end{itemize}
		\item none of those projects have been successful
		\item Result: Started project OsmocomBB in 01/2010
	\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}


\begin{frame}{Security analysis of GSM}{The bootstrapping process}
\begin{itemize}
	\item Start to read GSM specs (> 1000 PDF documents)
	\item Gradually grow knowledge about the protocols
	\item Obtain actual GSM network equipment (BTS)
	\item Try to get actual protocol traces as examples
	\item Start a complete protocol stack implementation from scratch
	\item Finally, go and play with GSM protocol security
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\subsection{The GSM network}

\begin{frame}{The GSM network}
  \begin{figure}[h]
  \centering
  \includegraphics[width=100mm]{gsm_network.png}
  \end{figure}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{GSM network components}
  \begin{itemize}
    \item The BSS (Base Station Subsystem)
    \begin{itemize}
      \item MS (Mobile Station): Your phone
      \item BTS (Base Transceiver Station): The {\em cell tower}
      \item BSC (Base Station Controller): Controlling up to hundreds of BTS
    \end{itemize}
    \item The NSS (Network Sub System)
    \begin{itemize}
      \item MSC (Mobile Switching Center): The central switch
      \item HLR (Home Location Register): Database of subscribers
      \item AUC (Authentication Center): Database of authentication keys
      \item VLR (Visitor Location Register): For roaming users
      \item EIR (Equipment Identity Register): To block stolen phones
    \end{itemize}
  \end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{GSM network interfaces}
  \begin{itemize}
    \item Um: Interface between MS and BTS
    \begin{itemize}
	\item the only interface that is specified over radio
    \end{itemize}
    \item A-bis: Interface between BTS and BSC
    \item A: Interface between BSC and MSC
    \item B: Interface between MSC and other MSC
  \end{itemize}
  GSM networks are a prime example of an asymmetric distributed network,
  very different from the end-to-end transparent IP network.
\end{frame}


\subsection{The GSM protocols}

\begin{frame}{GSM network protocols}{On the Um interface}
  \begin{itemize}
    \item Layer 1: Radio Layer, TS 04.04
    \item Layer 2: LAPDm, TS 04.06
    \item Layer 3: Radio Resource, Mobility Management, Call Control: TS 04.08
    \item Layer 4+: for USSD, SMS, LCS, ...
  \end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{GSM network protocols}{On the A-bis interface}
  \begin{itemize}
    \item Layer 1: Typically E1 line, TS 08.54
    \item Layer 2: A variant of ISDN LAPD with fixed TEI's, TS 08.56
    \item Layer 3: OML (Organization and Maintenance Layer, TS 12.21)
    \item Layer 3: RSL (Radio Signalling Link, TS 08.58)
    \item Layer 4+: transparent messages that are sent to the MS via Um
  \end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\include{section-openbsc}

\include{section-osmocombb}

\section{Summary}

\subsection{What we've learned}

\begin{frame}{Summary}{What we've learned}
\begin{itemize}
	\item The GSM industry is making security analysis very difficult
	\item It is well-known that the security level of the GSM stacks is very low
	\item We now have multiple solutions for sending arbitrary protocol data
	\begin{itemize}
		\item From a rogue network to phones (OpenBSC, OpenBTS)
		\item Frem a FOSS controlled phone to the network (OsmocomBB)
		\item From an A-bis proxy to the network or the phones
	\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\subsection{Where we go from here}

\begin{frame}{TODO}{Where we go from here}
\begin{itemize}
	\item The tools for fuzzing mobile phone protocol stacks are available
	\item It is up to the security community to make use of those tools (!)
	\item Don't you too think that TCP/IP security is boring?
	\item Join the GSM protocol security research projects
	\item Boldly go where no man has gone before
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\subsection{Where we go from here}

\begin{frame}{Current Areas of Work / Future plans}
\begin{itemize}
	\item UMTS(3G) support for NodeB and femtocells
	\item SS7 / MAP integration
	\item Playing with SIM Toolkit from the operator side
	\item Playing with MMS
	\item More exploration of RRLP + SUPL
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\subsection{Further Reading}

\begin{frame}{Further Reading}
\begin{itemize}
	\item \url{http://laforge.gnumonks.org/papers/gsm_phone-anatomy-latest.pdf}
	\item \url{http://bb.osmocom.org/}
	\item \url{http://openbsc.gnumonks.org/}
	\item \url{http://openbts.sourceforge.net/}
	\item \url{http://airprobe.org/}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\end{document}