CVE-2020-10134
CVE-2020-10134 — Bluetooth devices supporting LE and specific BR/EDR implementations are vulnerable to method confusion attacks
Pairing in Bluetooth® Core v5.2 and earlier may permit an unauthenticated attacker to acquire credentials with two pairing devices via adjacent access when the unauthenticated user initiates different pairing methods in each peer device and an end-user erroneously completes both pairing procedures with the MITM using the confirmation number of one peer as the passkey of the other. An adjacent, unauthenticated attacker could be able to initiate any Bluetooth operation on either attacked device exposed by the enabled Bluetooth profiles. This exposure may be limited when the user must authorize certain access explicitly, but so long as a user assumes that it is the intended remote device requesting permissions, device-local protections may be weakened.
Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, certcc
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.
Exploitation
Unreported
no source claims exploitation
EPSS
1%
chance of exploitation in 30 days
CVSS base
6.3
MEDIUM
Affected scope
The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.
Vendors (1)
Products (1)
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.3 | CVSS 3.1 | MEDIUM | — | — | cvelistV5 |
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-351
References
2 on the record
- kb.cert.org/vuls/id/534195/
third-party-advisory, x_refsource_CERT-VN
- www.bluetooth.com/learn-about-bluetooth/bluetooth-technology/bluetooth-security/method-vulnerability/
x_refsource_CONFIRM
Elsewhere on this site
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.