I have requirement of getting an unique identification number programmatically from all j2me supported phones.
As we already know getting IMEI / IMSI in S40 devices is almost not possible, bluetooth MAC address / obex push profile UUID may help. But for this, bluetooth should be turned on in mobile. And I don't know how many devices will support jsr82.
Is there some other unique id which will differentiate j2me devices?
Use the value of System.currentTimeMillis() when the user first starts the app. Unless two users start their app at precisely the same millisecond (v. unlikely), this will be unique.
Just now i got answer from other source:
There are no other unique IDs than IMEI, Bluetooth or WLAN (when available) MAC addresses. Redesign your solution not to depend on such entirely, or so that some ID you generate/assign yourself is sufficient (possibly in conjuntion with a username/password combination).
Any other ideas?
Related
I am developing an app that controls a product's operation. The communication is via BLE. My configuration is
App - Peripheral (iOS, Android)
Product - Central (uses Laird BT900 module)
iOS as a peripheral works fine (pairing and bonding) ; Android PIN pairing works fine, but subsequent bonding (or reconnect when in range) there are a lot of issues and termination of connection. I am using the supported list of devices for Android BLE and I also understand that there are many known issues that come with different manufacturers/chipset vendors
The issue I am getting is, as seen by nrfConnect, is with descriptors. Android app doesnt show descriptors when seen in nrfConnect whereas iOS shows. I do not know what is the difference
Is it a common practice to use a phone as a peripheral ? Or is it a risk - because this is a medical device.
Are there any best practices for Android as a peripheral ?
I have following back up plans in case Android issue is not resolved. I think following would work on any BLE supported phones without having any issues with the variability.
Plan A : PIN pairing on every connection with the product. This is the most secure and most annoying
Plan B : Implement just works pairing with a app layer password before taking control of the product.
Question : Is just works safe and encrypted ? Is it snoop-safe or MITM-safe ?
Thanks in advance!
A few thoughts from your questions:
1a. (From my Android experience) I think its uncommon to have the phone be the peripheral. To my knowledge all iOS devices support peripheral mode but only a very small subset of Android devices are able to support it. I say this because I've been experimenting with BTLE beacons using the AltBeacon library. From this work I have discovered that only certain Android phones can broadcast BTLE advertise packets. Given that BTLE advertising is the first step in initiating a BTLE session I imagine that this prevents many Android phones from being compatible with peripheral mode.
If all of your users can use an iOS device, then you're set, otherwise this may be a problem.
1b) I can't speak to the specific risk of using a mobile device with your medical device, that depends on what the medical device is doing and how you're using the mobile app.
2) See 1a
3) The specific encryption scheme you used is also based on your product's risk profile. I would say that Just Works is not an ideal solution. The just works pairing process is not snoop-safe and can be re-initiated via a MITM. Other than that I can't speak to the strength of BTLE encryption.
I have a little hw with a BLE module that communicates with an iOS device.
I would like to perform a discovery using iBeacon (so using iBeacon advertisement packets) and - obviously - connection (and data exchange) using CoreBluetooth, but there are some issues.
Before describing the issues, I have to tell you that I need to provide these information in discovery phase:
Serial number (needed for internal purposes) - 6 characters and 10
numbers.
A "hw version" to specify what type of product it is (each product
uses a different protocol).
The problem I have is basically how to perform the discovery phase and then connect to a particular discovered object:
A. In the iBeacon adv packet, I should use UUID field for serial
number and major/minor field for the hw version, but if I do so, the
devices will be basically not discoverable (iBeacon SDK for iOS
needs to know the UUID to look for before starting the monitoring
phase, so it cannot be different for every device).
B. In iOS, the iBeacon features are available through CoreLocation libraries,
the standard BLE features are instead available through CoreBluetooth.
If I use an iBeacon advertisement packet, the objects discovered by
CoreBluetooth libraries do not see any information of the package
(so, the problem is: "How do I know which is the object with serial
XYZ?").
I realized that a possible solution for my problem would be advertising both iBeacon and standard BLE packages, in a "round robin way" let's say.
I tried it (I advertised for 500msec the iBeacon Package and for 500msec the standard BLE one) and Standard BLE seems to be ok.
I still need to investigate more about how iBeacon discovery reacts to this, but as said it could be a solution.
OPTION 1: If you want to use an iBeacon advertisement, forget about encoding any info directly in the ProximityUUID. As you mention, you need to know this up front in iOS. Instead, make a lookup table to convert the iBeacon identifiers to Hardware Number / Serial Number. Like this:
Proximity UUID Major Minor HW/N S/N
2F234454-CF6D-4A0F-ADF2-F4911BA9FFA6 10001 10001 0001 abcdef0000000001
2F234454-CF6D-4A0F-ADF2-F4911BA9FFA6 10001 10002 0001 abcdef0000000002
This system would let you have 65536*65536 different serial numbers for a single UUID. You would need to store this table server-side and have a web service to look up the Hardware Number and Serial Number based on the UUID/Major/Minor.
My company offers a cloud service at http://www.proximitykit.com that lets you do exactly this. You can even use our web service API to programmatically add items to your lookup table. (It will probably be big.)
OPTION 2: Since you need CoreBluetooth after a connection is established, you might consider using CoreBluetooth for the whole thing. Your advertisement would be identical for all hardware types, but after connecting, the first data transfer to iOS from the device would contain the hardware number and serial number. You could then adjust the communication as needed based on the hardware number.
Is it possible using WiFi or Bluetooth to know where the hotspot is ?
I mean, from my mobile, know the distance and the bearing to head to it.
A single and static phone can hardly localize a hotspot. However, it may be achieved by multiple phones which cooperate with each other.
Moreover, I believe that Google has a database with the rough locations of static APs identified by SSID or MAC address all over the world. The RSSI values and locations (got from GPS or cellular network) are reported to a Google server by Android OS periodically - I guess. So you can achieve your goal if you have access to that database.
I've been playing with the Bluetooh sample from the Xcode RFCOMM_SPP which is what would do the job for me so I modified it but the discover devices does not pick a few simpler SPP devices(like a GPS)
I had a similar issue when doing the Android version and after digging I found out if I set up a proper UUID manually I'm on easy street and that got me rolling there really cool
Now back to the MAC I'm trying to see if the same process can be applied I see they have this IOBluetoothSDPUUID which picks a pre-cooked UUID, my guess is that if I do there what I did in Android I'd be able to see and interface with the GPS.
Is it possible to set a UUID manually like adding it to the h files? Or is it blocked for "Made for Apple" devices like in the iPhone?
Are you programming for the MAC or iOS devices (iphone / ipad )
Bluetooth SPP profile is not supported (publicly) on iOS devices.
see this http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3647?viewlocale=en_US
So if you want to do something custom on these devices using non public interfaces, the only way is joining the MFi program
I wanted to create J2ME application, in which the application should work only with the SIM card that was used during installation. On SIM card (GSM) change the application should now work.
For achieving this, i thought of taking an signature of the simcard and save it in a persistent storage. On every start of the application the signature can be verified. Any idea of how to implement this.
Thanks in advance
The 'SATSA' (Security and Trust Services API aka JSR177) could be used from your J2ME application to communicate with the SIM. You could send '3GPP TS 11.11' commands to obtain the IMSI (select file DG_GSM, select file EF_IMSI, read binary).
Drawbacks are: (1) You're talking to the SIM on a relatively low level of abstraction (the ISO7816-4 layer); (2) Not all handsets support JSR177 at the moment.
I believe this is not possible. If it was possible with a specific phone it would not be possible in a generic way.
For ATT in US, for J2ME apps, the handset embeds "CarrierDeviceId" in the Jad file. This is unique per SIM card. So, if something similar is available to you, just read this Jad parameter the first time the app starts, save it to RMS or send it to server. Now each time the app starts, you can verify this number matches, and thus verify the SIM card is same.
You can also try obtaining the phone number that is tied to the SIM card and thus verify the old SIM is being used.