Idk maybe specify that it was determined to not be a backdoor. Right now it reads as anti-china fear mongering.

If anyone’s ever followed console emulator development, they know those undocumented commands are everywhere. There’s still people finding new ones for the N64 hardware

Edit: I should say undocumented behavior, not necessarily new commands

So instead of blatant racism based on a lie, you’re just going to dogwhistle racism based on a lie.

Thank you, your explanation / edit is much appreciated 👏 🥳 ❤️

Pull up a chair and pour yourself a stiff beverage…

TLDR: Don’t Panic.

If you have a regular old processor (MCU) and want to give it wireless capability, you can buy a wireless chip and stick it next to the processor, then have the MCU talk to it through a wired connection (typically UART or SPI). Think of it as the old ATDT commands that had your PC control your old screeching modems.

To standardize this communication protocol, folks came up with the Host Controller Interface (HCI) so you didn’t have to reinvent that protocol for every new chip. This was handy for people on the MCU side, since they could write firmware that worked with any wireless chip out there, and could swap out for a cheaper/faster one with minimal change.

Fast forward to the era of integrated MCU+wireless, where you had a little ARM or other lightweight processor plus a little radio, and the processor could run programs in a high-level API that abstracted out the low level wireless stuff. Plus, you could use the same radio for multiple wireless protocols, like BLE, wifi, ANT, etc. Nordic and TI were early adopters of this method.

Typically, it was the vendor’s own processor talking to their own wireless module, but they still implemented the full HCI interface and let it be accessed externally. Why? So if your design needed an extra beefy processor and used the MCU+wireless chip as a simple communication module, this would still work. The teeny MCU could be used to run something extra in parallel, or it could just sit idle. A typical example could be a laptop or cell phone. The little MCU is too small for everything else, so you pair it with a big chip and the big chip drives the little chip through HCI.

Sure, it would be cheaper if you just went with a basic ‘dumb’ wireless chip, as folks from CSR, Broadcom, and Dialog kept pointing out. But the market demanded integrated chips so we could have $10 activity trackers, fancy overpriced lightbulbs, and Twerking Santas (https://www.amazon.com/twerking-santa-claus/s?k=twerking+santa+claus).

For integrated MCU+wireless chips, most vendors didn’t release the super low-level firmware that ran between them. There was no need. It was internal plumbing. They exposed SDKs so you could control the wireless chip, or high-level Bluetooth/wifi APIs so you could connect and talk to the outside world in a few lines of code. These SDKs were unique to each vendor (like Nordic’s nRF Connect library, or TI’s SimpleLink SDK).

Then along came Espressif out of Shanghai, China with a combo chip (ESP8266) that offered processor + wifi and was so cheap and easy to program that it took the hobbyist market by storm. Oh, god… so many LED light strips, perfect for Christmas and blinky EDM lightup outfits (hello, Adafruit: https://www.adafruit.com/category/65).

Fast forward and Espressif drops the ESP32. A bigger, faster Tensilica Xtensa processor, with built-in flash storage, plus wifi, Bluetooth, and BLE in one place. Plus lots of peripherals, busses, and IO pins. Also, running FreeRTOS and eventually Arduino SDKs, and MicroPython. All for less than $5! It took off like a rocket. So many products. Plus, you could run them as little webservers. Who doesn’l love a little webserver in their pocket?

It’s gone through a few variations, including swapping out the Tensilica with an open-source RISC-V MCU, but otherwise it’s a massive seller and the gateway drug for most IoT/Smarthome nerds.

So along come these Tarlogic researchers, looking to build a direct USB to bluetooth library. This way, you can drive the wireless from, say Linux, directly. There are already BLE to USB stacks, but this one is giving access at the HCI level, in a C library. Handy if you’re doing research or developing drivers, but not the sort of thing your typical DIY pereon needs.

As part of their process, the researchers decide to dump the really low level ESP32 firmware and reverse engineer it.

A typical HCI implementation is a giant event loop that handles HCI opcodes and parameters. Host wants to talk to the outside world, it sets up some registers, configures the unique MAC address, then opens a channel and starts sending/receiving (hopefully without the modem screeching tones). There are typical packet encoders and decoders, multiple ISO/TCP layers, and the sort of thing that most people assume somebody else has gotten right.

For fancier implementations, there may be interrupt or DMA support. Sometimes, there’s a multi-tasking part under the hood so they can time-slice between wifi, bluetooth, and ble (aka Fusion or Coexistence support). Not that you should care. The internals of this stuff is usually nobody’s business and the vendors just include a binary blob as part of their SDK that handles things. The host systems just talk HCI. The wireless side talks HCI on the wired side, and wireless on the radio side. Everyone’s happy.

In the process of reverse engineering the low-level HCI blob, these researchers found a few extra undocumented HCI opcodes. They’re not sure what they’re for, but according to their presentation (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25554812-2025-rootedcon-bluetoothtools/) if my super rusty Spanish holds up, it has to do with setting MAC addresses and handling low-level Link-Level Control Protocol communications (https://www.ellisys.com/technology/een_bt10.pdf).

Now in an of itself, this is no big deal. ESP32s already let you easily set your own temporary MAC address (https://randomnerdtutorials.com/get-change-esp32-esp8266-mac-address-arduino/), so there has to be a way to override the manufacturer one. And LLCP management is a totally geeky low-level thing that the MCU needs when handling wireless packets. There are perfectly good reasons why the opcodes would be there and why Espressif may not have documented them (for example, they could be used only during manufacturing QA).

So the original presentation is a teeny bit of an exaggeration. Yes, the opcodes exists. But are they nefarious? Should we stick all our ESP32s inside Faraday cages? Is this a secret plan for the CCP to remotely control our lights and plunge the world into chaos?

As I said before, ONLY if there’s a secret as-yet-undiscovered wireless handshake that gives remote wireless access to these (or really, pretty much any other published HCI opcode). That presentation most definitely doesn’t claim that.

To see if there is a REAL backdoor, you should wait for an analysis from fine professional wireless debugging vendors like Ellisys (starting models run $30K and up), Frontline, or Spanalytics.

Incidentally, Tarlogic, the group that put out that paper have their own BLE analyzer product (https://www.tarlogic.com/es/productos/analizador-bluetooth-le/). They look to know their stuff, so they should know better than putting out clickbait-y hair-on-fire reports. But come on, who can resist a good CCP/backdoor headline? Will media run with this and blow it out of proportion? No way!

If you’ve read this far, you must safely be on your third drink or the edible’s just kicked in. Stop panicking, and wait until the pro sniffer and Bluetooth forum people give their opinions.

If it turns out there is an actual WIRELESS backdoor, then by all means, feel free to panic and toss out all your Smarthome plugs. Go ahead and revert to getting up and flicking on your light switch like a peasant. Have a sad, twerk-free Christmas.

But over a few undocumented HCI opcodes? Have another drink and relax.

Happy Sunday.

PS: controversy already up on wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESP32

PPS: you may want to stock up on ESP32s for your light-up Christmas light project. Don’t be surprised if Espressif doesn’t get smacked with some hard tariffs or an outright ban, based on these ragebait headlines 🤷🏻‍♂️

Jesus. Okay. So when you say, “being short sighted”, you don’t literally mean they have myopia. You mean it figuratively. Exactly like the person you are correcting clearly means it figuratively when they say “short-term memory”.

No, ‘China bad’ because many many examples of China bad. Such as the topic of this post.

The whole “you can’t criticize China because you’re from a country that also does bad things” is logically worthless. It’s the appeal to hypocrisy fallacy.

Not sure if you realize this but China is also ruled by a kleptocratic billionaire class that loots the working class even moreso than the US, so i’m not sure why you look up to them - China has more billionaires and a much larger wealth divide than the US. Actions speak louder than words and while Xi and the CCP often talk about cracking down on thier ultra-wealthy, they don’t really do much - couple billionaires might disappear occasionally though if they don’t praise the party line publically. One thing is for sure - I don’t see any elite CCP party members that are not also very wealthy. And it’s everyone else that’s propagandized 🤔

China is bad, because they too are a colonialism and imperialistic nation.

Just like the US and Russia.

Thats super interesting! Write a poem about three gorges dam please

the reality is that every Chinese company is ultimately controlled by the CCP.

Yes.

But in the same way that every US company is ultimately controlled by the US Government. And every EU company by them. And every other country by their own government.

CCP has backdoor into every tech that comes out of China. It’s not about just privacy. They control democracies based on shaping narratives. They’ll utilize everything that democracy offers and use it against countries. They don’t have freedom of speech or press so they themselves are not victims of it. EVs are really just computers on the road. Flooding the market with Chinese EVs would just mean creating a massive free network on a foreign soil for them.

Europe and its 50 car makers could also be considered instead of China…

thats a very fair point, I had not seen anyone else make this one But the problem is that in this case, this functionality was entirely undocumented. I dont think it was intended for programmers.

Now if the firmware was open source, people would have gotten to know about this much sooner even if not documented. Also such functionality should ideally be gated somehow through some auth mechanism.

Also just like how the linux kernel allows decades old devices to be at the very least patched for security risks, open firmware would allow users of this chip to patch it themselves for bugs, security issues.

I wonder which IoT devices are affected, beyond DIY, that people actually use in North America.