Category Archives: SDM

PyHSS Update – MongoDB Backend & SQN Resync

24/11/2019EPC, EUTRAN, LTE, Mobile Networks, Python, RFCs & Standards, SDM, Security, SoftwareDiameter, HSS, PyHSS, PythonNick

After a few quiet months I’m excited to say I’ve pushed through some improvements recently to PyHSS and it’s growing into a more usable HSS platform.

MongoDB Backend

This has a few obvious advantages – More salable, etc, but also opens up the ability to customize more of the subscriber parameters, like GBR bearers, etc, that simple flat text files just wouldn’t support, as well as the obvious issues with threading and writing to and from text files at scale.

Knock knock.
Race condition.
Who’s there?
— Threading Joke.

For now I’m using the Open5GS MongoDB schema, so the Open5Gs web UI can be used for administering the system and adding subscribers.

The CSV / text file backend is still there and still works, the MongoDB backend is only used if you enable it in the YAML file.

The documentation for setting this up is in the readme.

SQN Resync

If you’re working across multiple different HSS’ or perhaps messing with some crypto stuff on your USIM, there’s a chance you’ll get the SQN (The Sequence Number) on the USIM out of sync with what’s on the HSS.

This manifests itself as an Update Location Request being sent from the UE in response to an Authentication Information Answer and coming back with a Re-Syncronization-Info AVP in the Authentication Info AVP. I’ll talk more about how this works in another post, but in short PyHSS now looks at this value and uses it combined with the original RAND value sent in the Authentication Information Answer, to find the correct SQN value and update whichever database backend you’re using accordingly, and then send another Authentication Information Answer with authentication vectors with the correct SQN.

SQN Resync is something that’s really cryptographically difficult to implement / confusing, hence this taking so long.

What’s next? – IMS / Multimedia Auth

The next feature that’s coming soon is the Multimedia Authentication Request / Answer to allow CSCFs to query for IMS Registration and manage the Cx and Dx interfaces.

Code for this is already in place but failing some tests, not sure if that’s to do with the MAA response or something on my CSCFs,

Keep an eye on the GitLab repo!

Querying Auth Credentials from USIM/SIM cards

23/11/2019EPC, EUTRAN, GSM, LTE, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, SDM, Security, SIM CardsAuthentication, Diameter, EUTRAN, HSS, LTE, SIM, USIM, XRESNick

LTE has great concepts like NAS that abstract the actual transport layers, so the NAS packet is generated by the UE and then read by the MME.

One thing that’s a real headache about private LTE is the authentication side of things. You’ll probably bash your head against a SIM programmer for some time.

As your probably know when connecting to a network, the UE shares it’s IMSI / TIMSI with the network, and the MME requests authentication information from the HSS using the Authentication Information Request over Diameter.

The HSS then returns a random value (RAND), expected result (XRES), authentication token (AUTN) and a KASME for generating further keys,

The RAND and AUTN values are sent to the UE, the USIM in the UE calculates the RES (result) and sends it back to the MME. If the RES value received by the MME is equal to the expected RES (XRES) then the subscriber is mutually authenticated.

The osmocom guys have created a cool little utility called osmo-sim-auth, which allows you to simulate the UE’s baseband module’s calls to the USIM to authenticate.

Using this tool I was able to plug a USIM into my USIM reader, using the Diameter client built into PyHSS I was able to ask for Authentication vectors for a UE using the Authentication Information Request to the HSS and was sent back the Authentication Information Answer containing the RAND and AUTN values, as well as the XRES value.

Wireshark Diameter Authentication Information Response message body looking at the E-UTRAN vectors — Diameter – Authentication Information Response showing E-UTRAN Vectors

Then I used the osmo-sim-auth app to query the RES and RAND values against the USIM.

Osmocom's USIM Test tool - osmo-sim-auth

The RES I got back matched the XRES, meaning the HSS and the USIM are in sync (SQNs match) and they mutually authenticated.

Handy little tool!

HSS & USIM Authentication in LTE/NR (4G & 5G)

17/11/2019EPC, EUTRAN, LTE, Mobile Networks, RF, SDM, Security, SIM CardsAuthentication, AUTN, EUTRAN, HSS, K, LTE, OPc, PyHSS, RES, USIM, XRESNick

I talked a bit in my last post about using osmo-sim-auth to authenticate against a USIM / SIM card when it’s not in a phone,

I thought I’d expand a little on how the Crypto side of things works in LTE & NR (also known as 4G & 5G).

Authentication primarily happens in two places, one at each end of the network, the Home Subscriber Server and in the USIM card. Let’s take a look at each of them.

On the USIM

On the USIM we’ve got two values that are entered in when the USIM is provisioned, the K key – Our secret key, and an OPc key (operator key).

These two keys are the basis of all the cryptography that goes on, so should never be divulged.

The only other place to have these two keys in the HSS, which associates each K key and OPc key combination with an IMSI.

The USIM also stores the SQN a sequence number, this is used to prevent replay attacks and is incremented after each authentication challenge, starting at 1 for the first authentication challenge and counting up from there.

On the HSS

On the HSS we have the K key (Secret key), OPc key (Operator key) and SQN (Sequence Number) for each IMSI on our network.

Each time a IMSI authenticates itself we increment the SQN, so the value of the SQN on the HSS and on the USIM should (almost) always match.

Authentication Options

Let’s imagine we’re designing the authentication between the USIM and the Network; let’s look at some options for how we can authenticate everyone and why we use the process we use.

Failed Option 1 – Passwords in the Clear

The HSS could ask the USIM to send it’s K and OPc values, compare them to what the HSS has in place and then either accept or reject the USIM depending on if they match.

The obvious problem with this that to send this information we broadcast our supposedly secret K and OPc keys over the air, so anyone listening would get our secret values, and they’re not so secret anymore.
This is why we don’t use this method.

Failed Option 2 – Basic Crypto

So we’ve seen that sending our keys publicly, is out of the question.

The HSS could ask the USIM to mix it’s K key and OPc key in such a way that only someone with both keys could unmix them.

This is done with some cryptographic black magic, all you need to know is it’s a one way function you enter in values and you get the same result every time with the same input, but you can’t work out the input from the result.

The HSS could then get the USIM to send back the result of mixing up both keys, mix the two keys it knows and compare them.

The HSS mixes the two keys itself, and get’s it’s own result called XRES (Expected Result). If the RES (result) of mixing up the keys by the USIM is matches the result when the HSS mixes the keys in the same way (XRES (Expected Result)), the user is authenticated.

The result of mixing the keys by the USIM is called RES (Result), while the result of the HSS mixing the keys is called XRES (Expected Result).

This is a better solution but has some limitations, because our special mixing of keys gets the same RES each time we put in our OPc and K keys each time a subscriber authenticates to the network the RES (result) of mixing the keys is going to be the same.

This is vulnerable to replay attacks. An attacker don’t need to know the two secret keys (K & OPc) that went into creating the RES (resulting output) , the attacker would just need to know the result of RES, which is sent over the air for anyone to hear.
If the attacker sends the same RES they could still authenticate.
This is why we don’t use this method.

Failed Option 3 – Mix keys & add Random

To prevent these replay attacks we add an element of randomness, so the HSS generates a random string of garbage called RAND, and sends it to the USIM.

The USIM then mixes RAND (the random string) the K key and OPc key and sends back the RES (Result).

Because we introduced a RAND value, every time the RAND is different the RES is different. This prevents against the replay attacks we were vulnerable to in our last example.

If the result the USIM calculated with the K key, OPc key and random data is the same as the USIM calculated with the same K key, OPc key and same random data, the user is authenticated.

While an attacker could reply with the same RES, the random data (RAND) will change each time the user authenticates, meaning that response will be invalid.

The problem here is now the network has authenticated the USIM, the USIM hasn’t actually verified it’s talking to the real network.
This is why we don’t use this method.

GSM authentication worked like this, but in a GSM network you could setup your HLR (The GSM version of a HSS) to allow in every subscriber regardless of what the value of RES they sent back was, meaning it didn’t look at the keys at all, this meant attackers could setup fake base stations to capture users.

Option 4 – Mutual Authentication (Real World*)

So from the previous options we’ve learned:

Our network needs to authenticate our subscribers, in a way that can’t be spoofed / replayed so we know who to bill & where to route traffic.
Our subscribers need to authenticate the network so they know they can trust it to carry their traffic.

So our USIM needs to authenticate the network, in the same way the network authenticates the USIM.

To do this we introduce a new key for network authentication, called AUTN.

The AUTN key is generated by the HSS by mixing the secret keys and RAND values together, but in a different way to how we mix the keys to get RES. (Otherwise we’d get the same key).

This AUTN key is sent to the USIM along with the RAND value. The USIM runs the same mixing on it’s private keys and RAND the HSS did to generate the AUTN , except this is the USIM generated – An Expected AUTN key (XAUTN). The USIM compares XAUTN and AUTN to make sure they match. If they do, the USIM then knows the network knows their secret keys.

The USIM then does the same mixing it did in the previous option to generate the RES key and send it back.

The network has now authenticated the subscriber (HSS has authenticated the USIM via RES key) and the subscriber has authenticated the USIM (USIM authenticates HSS via AUTN key).

*This is a slightly simplified version of how EUTRAN / LTE authentication works between the HSS and the USIM – In reality there are a few extra values, such as SQN to take into consideration and the USIM talks to to the MME not the HSS directly.

I’ll do a follow up post covering the more nitty-gritty elements, AMF and SQN fields, OP vs OPc keys, SQN Resync, how this information is transfered in the Authentication Information Answer and how KASME keys are used / distributed.

Roll your own USIMs for Private LTE Networks

03/11/2019EPC, EUTRAN, IMS / VoLTE, LTE, Mobile Networks, SDM, Security, SIM CardsAuthentication, EPC, IMSI, K, LTE, OPc, RAN, SIM, USIMNick

I wrote a while ago about USIM basics and talked about what each of the fields stored on a USIM manage, but I thought I’d talk a little about my adventures in getting custom USIMs.

I started working on a private LTE project a while ago; RAN hardware (eNodeBs) were on the way, down to a shortlist of a few EPC platforms, but I still needed USIMs before anyone was connecting to the network.

So why are custom USIMs a requirement? Can’t you just use any old USIM/SIMs?

In UMTS / LTE / NR networks there’s mutual network authentication, again I’ve written about this topic before, but unlike GSM where the network authenticates the UE, in later RAN standards, the UE also authenticates the network. (This mitigates any bad actor from setting up their own base stations and having UEs attach to it and have their traffic intercepted).

For roaming to work between carriers they’ve got to have their HSS / DRA connecting to the DRA or HSS of other carriers, to allow roaming subscribers to access the network, otherwise they too would fall foul of the mutual network authentication and the USIM wouldn’t connect to the network.

The first USIMs I purchased online through a popular online marketplace with a focus on connecting you to Chinese manufacturers.
They listed a package of USIMS, a USB reader/writer that supported all the standard USIM form factors and the software to program it, which I purchased.

The USIMs worked fairly well – They are programmable via a card reader and software that, although poorly translated/documented, worked fairly well.

K and OP/OPc values could be written to the card but not read, while the other values could be read and written from the software, the software also has the ability to sequentially program the USIMs to make bulk operations easier. The pricing worked out about $8 USD per USIM, which although expensive for the quantity and programmable element is pretty reasonable.

Every now and then the Crypto values for some reason or another wouldn’t get updated, which is exactly as irritating as it sounds.

Pretty quickly into the build I learned the USIMs didn’t include an ISIM service on the card, ISIM being the service that runs on the UCCID responsible for IMS / VoLTE authentication.

Again I went looking and reached out to a few manufacturers of USIMs.

The big vendors, Gemalto, Kona, etc, weren’t interested in providing USIMs in quantities less than 100,000 and their USIMs came from the factory pre-programmed, meaning the values could only be changed through remote SIM provisioning, a form of black magic.

In the end I reached out to an OEM manufacturer from China who provided programmable USIM / ISIMs for less than I was paying on the online marketplace and at any quantity I wanted with custom printing options, allocated ICCIDs, etc.

The non-programmable USIMs worked out less than $0.40 USD each in larger quantities, and programmable USIM/ISIMs for about $5 USD.

The software was almost identical except for the additional tab for ISIM operations.

Smart Card Readers

In theory this software and these USIMs could be programmed by any smart card reader.

In practice, the fact that the ISO standard smart card is the same size as a credit card, means most smart card readers won’t fit the bill.

I tried a few smart card readers, from the one built into my Thinkpad, to a Bluedrive II from one of the USIM vendors, in the end the MCR3516 Smart Card Reader which reads 4FF USIMs (Standard ISO size smart card, full size SIM, Micro SIM and Nano SIM form factors, which saved on so much mucking about with form factor adapters etc.

4FF Smart Card Reader for programming SIM/USIM/ISIM

Future Projects

I’ve got some very calls “Multi Operator Neutral Host” (MoNEH) USIMs from the guys at Telet Research I’m looking forward to playing with,

eSIMs are on my to-do list too, and the supporting infrastructure, as well as Over the Air updating of USIMs.

Open5Gs- Python HSS Interface

05/10/2019EPC, LTE, Mobile Networks, Python, RF, SDMEPC, HSS, LTE, NextEPC, PythonNick

Note: NextEPC the Open Source project rebranded as Open5Gs in 2019 due to a naming issue. The remaining software called NextEPC is a branch of an old version of Open5Gs. This post was written before the rebranding.

I’ve been working for some time on Private LTE networks, the packet core I’m using is NextEPC, it’s well written, flexible and well supported.

I joined the Open5Gs group and I’ve contributed a few bits and pieces to the project, including a Python wrapper for adding / managing subscribers in the built in Home Subscriber Server (HSS).

You can get it from the support/ directory in Open5Gs.

NextEPC Python Library

Basic Python library to interface with MongoDB subscriber DB in NextEPC HSS / PCRF. Requires Python 3+, mongo, pymongo and bson. (All available through PIP)

If you are planning to run this on a different machine other than localhost (the machine hosting the MongoDB service) you will need to enable remote access to MongoDB by binding it’s IP to 0.0.0.0:

This is done by editing /etc/mongodb.conf and changing the bind IP to: bind_ip = 0.0.0.0

Restart MongoDB for changes to take effect.

$ /etc/init.d/mongodb restart

Basic Example:

import NextEPC
NextEPC_1 = NextEPC("10.0.1.118", 27017)

pdn = [{'apn': 'internet', 'pcc_rule': [], 'ambr': {'downlink': 1234, 'uplink': 1234}, 'qos': {'qci': 9, 'arp': {'priority_level': 8, 'pre_emption_vulnerability': 1, 'pre_emption_capability': 1}}, 'type': 2}]
sub_data = {'imsi': '891012222222300', \
             'pdn': pdn, \
             'ambr': {'downlink': 1024000, 'uplink': 1024001}, \
             'subscribed_rau_tau_timer': 12, \
             'network_access_mode': 2, \
             'subscriber_status': 0, \
             'access_restriction_data': 32, \
             'security': {'k': '465B5CE8 B199B49F AA5F0A2E E238A6BC', 'amf': '8000', 'op': None, 'opc': 'E8ED289D EBA952E4 283B54E8 8E6183CA'}, '__v': 0}

print(NextEPC_1.AddSubscriber(sub_data))                        #Add Subscriber using dict of sub_data

print(NextEPC_1.GetSubscriber('891012222222300'))               #Get added Subscriber's details

print(NextEPC_1.DeleteSubscriber('891012222222300'))            #Delete Subscriber

Subscriber_List = NextEPC_1.GetSubscribers()
for subscribers in Subscriber_List:
  print(subscribers['imsi'])

Building Android APN / Carrier Config

18/08/2019EPC, EUTRAN, GSM, IMS / VoLTE, LTE, Mobile Networks, SIM Cards, SoftwareAndroid, EPC, LTENick

As anyone who’s setup a private LTE network can generally attest, APNs can be a real headache.

SIM/USIM cards, don’t store any APN details. In this past you may remember having to plug all these settings into your new phone when you upgraded so you could get online again.

Today when you insert a USIM belonging to a commercial operator, you generally don’t need to put APN settings in, this is because Android OS has its own index of APNs. When the USIM is inserted into the baseband module, the handset’s OS looks at the MCC & MNC in the IMSI and gets the APN settings automatically from Android’s database of APN details.

There is an option for the network to send the connectivity details to the UE in a special type of SMS, but we won’t go into that.

All this info is stored on the Android OS in apns-full-conf.xml which for non-rooted (stock) devices is not editable.

Instead the devices get updates through the OS updates which pull the latest copy of this file from Google’s Android Open Source Git repo, you can view the current master file here.

This file can override the user’s APN configuration, which can lead to some really confusing times as your EPC rejects the connection due to an unrecognized APN which is not what you have configured on the UE’s operating system, but it instead uses APN details from it’s database.

The only way around this is to change the apns-full-conf.xml file, either by modifying it per handset or submitting a push request to Android Open Source with your updated settings.

(I’ve only tried the former with rooted devices)

The XML file itself is fairly self explanatory, taking the MCC and MNC and the APN details for your network:

<apn carrier="CarrierXYZ"
      mcc="123"
      mnc="123"
      apn="carrierxyz"
      type="default,supl,mms,ims,cbs"
      mmsc="http://mms.carrierxyz.com"
      mmsproxy="0.0.0.0"
      mmsport="80"
      bearer_bitmask="4|5|6|7|8|12"
/>

Once you’ve added yours to the file, inserting the USIM, rebooting the handset or restarting the carrier app is all that’s required for it to be re-read and auto provision APN settings from the XML file.

Diameter Routing Agents (DRA)

28/07/2019EPC, LTE, Mobile Networks, SDMDiameter, DRANick

Diameter is used extensively in 3GPP networks (Especially LTE) to provide the AAA services.

The Diameter protocol is great, and I’ve sung it’s praises before, but one issue operators start to face is that there are a lot of diameter peers, each of which needs a connection to other diameter peers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Multimedia_Subsystem#/media/File:Ims_overview.png

This diagram is an “Overview” showing one of each network element – In reality almost all network elements will exist more than once for redundancy and scalability.

What you start to end up with is a rats nest of connections, lines drawn everywhere and lots of manual work and room for human error when it comes to setting up the Diameter Peer relationships.

Let’s say you’ve got 5x MME, 5x PCRF, 2x HSS, 5x S-SCSF and 5x Packet Gateways, each needing Diameter peer relationships setup, it starts to get really messy really quickly.

Enter the Diameter Routing Agent – DRA.

Now each device only needs a connection to the DRA, which in turn has a connection to each Diameter peer. Adding a new MME doesn’t mean you need to reconfigure your HSS, just connect the MME to the DRA and away you go.

I’ll cover using Kamailio to act as a Diameter routing agent in a future post.

PyHSS – Python 3GPP LTE Home Subscriber Server

21/07/2019EPC, EUTRAN, IMS / VoLTE, LTE, Mobile Networks, Python, RF, RFCs & Standards, SDMDiameter, HSS, Python, rfc6733Nick

I recently started working on an issue that I’d seen was to do with the HSS response to the MME on an Update Location Answer.

I took some Wireshark traces of a connection from the MME to the HSS, and compared that to a trace from a different HSS. (Amarisoft EPC/HSS)

The Update Location Answer sent by the Amarisoft HSS to the MME over the S6a (Diameter) interface includes an AVP for “Multiple APN Configuration” which has the the dedicated bearer for IMS, while the HSS in the software I was working on didn’t.

After a bit of bashing trying to modify the S6a responses, I decided I’d just implement my own Home Subscriber Server.

The Diameter interface is pretty straight forward to understand, using a similar structure to RADIUS, and with the exception of the Crypto for the EUTRAN Authentication Vectors, it was all pretty straight forward.

If you’d like to know more you can download PyHSS from my GitLab page, and view my Diameter Primer post and my post on Diameter packet structure.

Diameter Basics

25/06/2019EPC, EUTRAN, LTE, Mobile Networks, RF, RFCs & Standards, SDM, VoIPDiameter, rfc6733Nick

3GPP selected Diameter protocol to take care of Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting (AAA).

It’s typically used to authenticate users on a network, authorize them to use services they’re allowed to use and account for how much of the services they used.

In a EPC scenario the Authentication function takes the form verifying the subscriber is valid and knows the K & OP/OPc keys for their specific IMSI.

The Authorization function checks to find out which features, APNs, QCI values and services the subscriber is allowed to use.

The Accounting function records session usage of a subscriber, for example how many sessional units of talk time, Mb of data transferred, etc.

Diameter Packets are pretty simple in structure, there’s the packet itself, containing the basic information in the headers you’d expect, and then a series of one or more Attribute Value Pairs or “AVPs”.

These AVPs are exactly as they sound, there’s an attribute name, for example username, and a value, for example, “Nick”.

This could just as easily be for ordering food; we could send a Diameter packet with an imaginary command code for Food Order Request, containing a series of AVPs containing what we want. The AVPs could belike Food: Hawian Pizza, Food: Garlic Bread, Drink: Milkshake, Address: MyHouse.
The Diameter server could then verify we’re allowed to order this food (Authorization) and charge us for the food (Accounting), and send back a Food Order Response containing a series of AVPs such as Delivery Time: 30 minutes, Price: $30.00, etc.

Diameter packets generally take the form of a request – response, for example a Capabilities Exchange Request contains a series of AVPs denoting the features supported by the requester, which is sent to a Diameter peer. The Diameter peer then sends back a Capabilities Exchange Response, containing a series of AVPs denoting the features that it supports.

Diameter is designed to be extensible, allowing vendors to define their own type of AVP and Diameter requests/responses and 3GPP have defined their own types of messages (Diameter Command Codes) and types of data to be transferred (AVP Codes).

LTE/EPC relies on Diameter and the 3GPP/ETSI defined AVP / Diameter Packet requests/responses to form the S6a Interface between an MME and a HSS, the Gx Interface between the PCEF and the PCRF, Cx Interface between the HSS and the CSCF, and many more interfaces used for Authentication in 3GPP networks.

LTE (4G) – TMSI & GUTI

18/05/2019EPC, EUTRAN, LTE, Mobile Networks, Notes, RF, SDMEUTRAN, Keys, LTE, MAC, RANNick

We’ve already touched on how subscribers are authenticated to the network, how the network is authenticated to subscribers and how the key hierarchy works for encryption of user data and control plane data.

If the IMSI was broadcast in the clear over the air, anyone listening would have the unique identifier of the subscriber nearby and be able to track their movements.

We want to limit the use of the IMSI over the air to a minimum.

During the first exchange the terminal is forced to send it’s IMSI, it’s the only way we can go about authenticating to the network, but once the terminal is authenticated and encryption of the radio link has been established, the network allocates a temporary identifier to the terminal, called the Temporary Mobile Subscriber Identity (TMSI) by the serving MME.

The TMSI is given to the terminal once encryption is setup, so only the network and the terminal know the mapping between IMSI and TMSI.

The TMSI is used for all future communication between the Network and the Terminal, hiding the IMSI.

The TMSI can be updated / changed at regular intervals to ensure the IMSI-TMSI mapping cannot be ascertained by a process of elimination.

The TMSI is short – only 4 bytes long – and this only has significance for the serving MME.

For the network to ascertain what MME is serving what TMSI the terminal is also assigned a Globally Unique Temporary (UE) Identity (GUTI), to identify the MME that knows the TMSI to IMSI mapping.

The GUTI is made up of the MNC/MCC combination, then an MME group ID to identify the MME group the serving MME is in, a MME code to identify the MME that allocated the TMSI and finally the TMSI itself.

The decision to use the TMSI or GUTI in a dialog is dependant on the needs of the dialog and what information both sides have. For example in an MME change the GUTI is needed so the original IMSI can be determined by the new MME, while in a normal handover the TMSI is enough.

LTE (4G) – EUTRAN – Key Distribution and Hierarchy

17/05/2019LTE, Mobile Networks, RF, RFCs & Standards, Security, SIM CardsEUTRAN, Keys, LTE, MAC, RANNick

We’ve talked a bit in the past few posts about keys, K and all it’s derivatives, such as Kenc, Kint, etc.

Each of these is derived from our single secret key K, known only to the HSS and the USIM.

To minimise the load on the HSS, the HSS transfers some of the key management roles to the MME, without ever actually revealing what the secret key K actually is to the MME.

This means the HSS is only consulted by the MME when a UE/Terminal attaches to the network, and not each time it attaches to different cell etc.

When the UE/Terminal first attaches to the network, as outlined in my previous post, the HSS also generates an additional key it sends to the MME, called K-ASME.

K-ASME is the K key derived value generated by the HSS and sent to the MME. It sands for “Access Security Management Entity” key.

When the MME has the K-ASME it’s then able to generate the other keys for use within the network, for example the Kenb key, used by the eNodeB to generate the keys required for communications.

The USIM generates the K-ASME itself, and as it’s got the same input parameters, the K-ASME generated by the USIM is the same as that generated by the HSS.

The USIM can then give the terminal the K-ASME key, so it can generate the same Kenb key required to generate keys for complete communications.

Showing Kamse generation sequence in LTE.

Image sourced from IMTx: NET02x course on Edx,

LTE (4G) – Authenticating the Network

15/05/2019EPC, LTE, Mobile Networks, RF, RFCs & Standards, Security, SIM CardsAuthentication, EPC, IMSI, LTE, RANNick

In my last post we discussed how the network authenticated a subscriber, now we’ll look at how a subscriber authenticates to a network. There’s a glaring issue there in that the MME could look at the RES and the XRES and just say “Yup, OK” even if the results differed.

To combat this LTE networks have mutual authentication, meaning the network authenticates the subscribers as we’ve discussed, and the subscribers authenticate the network.

To do this our HSS will take the same random key (RAND) we used to authenticate the subscriber, and using a different cryptographic function (called g) take the RAND, the K value and a sequence number called SQN, and using these 3 inputs, generate a new result we’ll call AUTN.

The HSS sends the RAND (same as RAND used to authenticate the subscriber) and the output of AUTN to the MME which forwards it to the eNB to the UE which passes the RAND and AUTH values to the USIM.

The USIM takes the RAND and the K value from the HSS, and it’s expected sequence number. With these 3 values it applies the cryptographic function g generates it’s own AUTN result.

If it matches the AUTN result generated by the HSS, the USIM has authenticated the network.

LTE (4G) – Authenticating Subscribers

14/05/2019EPC, LTE, Mobile Networks, RF, RFCs & Standards, SDM, SIM CardsAuthentication, EPC, IMSI, LTE, RANNick

The USIM and the HSS contain the subscriber’s K key. The K key is a 128 bit long key that is stored on the subscriber’s USIM and in the HSS along with the IMSI.

The terminal cannot read the K key, neither can the network, it is never transmitted / exposed.

When the Terminal starts the attach procedure, it includes it’s IMSI, which is sent to the MME.

The MME then sends the the HSS a copy of the IMSI.

The HSS looks up the K key for that IMSI, and generates a random key called RAND.

The HSS and runs a cryptographic function (called f) using the input of RAND and K key for that IMSI, the result is called XRES (Expected result).

The HSS sends the output of this cryptographic function (XRES), and the random value (RAND) back to the MME.

The MME forwards the RAND value to the USIM (via eNB / Terminal), and stores a copy of the expected output of the cryptographic function.

The USIM take the RAND and the K key and performs the same cryptographic function the HSS did on it with the input of the K key and RAND value to generate it’s own result (RES).

The result of this same function (RES) is then sent from the USIM to the terminal which forwards it to the MME.

The MME and comparing the result the HSS generated (XRES) with the result the USIM generated. (RES)

If the two match it means both the USIM knows the K key, and is therefore the subscriber they’re claiming to be.

If the two do not match the UE is refused access to the network.

Next up, how the UE authenticates the network.

LTE (4G) – USIM Basics

13/05/2019LTE, Mobile Networks, RF, RFCs & Standards, Security, SIM CardsAuthentication, EPC, IMSI, K, LTE, OPc, RAN, SIM, USIMNick

I’ve been working on private LTE recently, and one of the first barriers you’ll hit will be authentication.

LTE doesn’t allow you to just use any SIM to authenticate to the network, but instead relies on mutual authentication of the UE and the network, so the Network knows it’s talking to the right UE and the UE knows it’s talking to the right network.

So because of this, you have to have full control over the SIM and the network. So let’s take a bit of a dive into USIMs.

So it’s a SIM card right?

As a bit of background; the ever shrinking card we all know as a SIM is a “Universal integrated circuit card” – a microcontroller with it’s own OS that generally has the ability to run Java applets.

One of the Java applets on the card / microcontroller will be the software stack for a SIM, used in GSM networks to authenticate the subscriber.

For UMTS and LTE networks the card would have a USIM software stack allowing it to act as a USIM, the evolved version of the SIM.

Because it’s just software a single card can run both a USIM and SIM software stack, and most do.

As I’m building an LTE network we’ll just talk about the USIM side of things.

USIM’s role in Authentication

When you fire up your mobile handset the baseband module in it communicates with the USIM application on the card.

When it comes time to authenticate to the network, and authenticate the network itself, the baseband module sends the provided challenge information from the network to the USIM which does the crypto magic to generate responses to the authentication challenges issued by the network, and the USIM issues it’s own challenges to the network.

The Baseband module provides the ingredients, but the USIM uses it’s secret recipe / ingredients combo, known only to the USIM and HSS, to perform the authentication.

Because the card challenges the network it means we’ve got mutual authentication of the network.

This prevents anyone from setting up their own radio network from going all Lionel Ritche and saying “Hello, is it me you’re looking for” and having all the UEs attach to the malicious network. (Something that could be done on GSM).

It’s worth noting too that because the USIM handles all this the baseband module, and therefore the mobile handset itself, doesn’t know any of the secret sauce used to negotiate with the network. It just gets the challenge and forwards the ingredients down to the USIM which spits back the correct response to send, without sharing the magic recipe.

This also means operators can implement their own Crypto functions for f and g, so long as the HSS and the USIM know how to generate the RES and AUTN results, it’ll work.

What’s Inside?

Let’s take a look at the information that’s stored on your USIM:

All the GSM stuff for legacy SIM application

Generally USIMs also have the ability to operate as SIMs in a GSM network, after all it’s just a different software stack. We won’t touch on GSM SIMs here.

ICCID

Because a USIM is just an application running on a Universal Integrated Circuit Card, it’s got a ICCID or Universal Integrated Circuit Card ID. Generally this is the long barcode / string of numbers printed on the card itself.

The network generally doesn’t care about this value, but operators may use it for logistics like shipping out cards.

PIN & PUK

PINs and PUKs are codes to unlock the card. If you get the PIN wrong too many times you need the longer PUK to unlock it.

These fields can be written to (when authenticated to the card) but not read directly, only challenged. (You can try a PIN, but you can’t see what it’s set too).

As we mentioned before the terminal will ask the card if that’s correct, but the terminal doesn’t know the PIN either.

IMSI

Each subscriber has an IMSI, an International Mobile Subscriber Identity.

IMSIs are hierarchical, starting with 3 digit Mobile Country Code MCC, then the Mobile Network Code (MNC) (2/3 digits) and finally a Mobile Subscription Identification Number (MSIN), a unique number allocated by the operator to the subscribers in their network.

This means although two subscribers could theoretically have the same MSIN they wouldn’t share the same MNC and MCC so the ISMI would still be unique.

The IMSI never changes, unless the subscriber changes operators when they’ll be issued a new USIM card by the new operator, with a different IMSI (differing MNC).

The MSIN isn’t the same as the phone number / MSISDN Number, but an IMSI generally has a MSISDN associated with it by the network. This allows you to port / change MSISDN numbers without changing the USIM/SIM.

K – Subscriber Key

Subscriber’s secret key known only to the Subscriber and the Authentication Center (AuC/ HSS).

All the authentication rests on the principle that this one single secret key (K) known only to the USIM and the AuC/HHS.

OP – Operator Code

Operator Code – same for all SIMs from a single operator.

Used in combination with K as an input for some authentication / authorisation crypto generation.

Because the Operator Code is common to all subscribers in the network, if this key were to be recovered it could lead to security issues, so instead OPc is generally used.

OPc – Operator Code (Derived)

Instead of giving each USIM the Operator Code a derived operator code can be precomputed when the USIM is written with the K key.

This means the OP is not stored on the USIM.

OPc=Encypt-Algo(OP,Key)

PLMN (Public Land Mobile Network)

The PLMN is the combination of MCC & MNC that identifies the operator’s radio access network (RAN) from other operators.

While there isn’t a specific PLMN field in most USIMs it’s worth understanding as several fields require a PLMN.

HPLMNwAcT (HPLMN selector with Access Technology)

Contains in order of priority, the Home-PLMN codes with the access technology specified.

This allows the USIM to work out which PLMN to attach to and which access technology (RAN), for example if the operator’s PLMN was 50599 we could have:

50599 E-UTRAN
50599 UTRAN

To try 4G and if that fails use 3G.

In situations where operators might partner to share networks in different areas, this could be set to the PLMN of the operator first, then it’s partnered operator second.

OPLMNwACT (Operator controlled PLMN selector with Access
Technology)

This is a list of PLMNs the operator has a roaming agreement with in order of priority and with the access technology.

An operator may roam to Carrier X but only permit UTRAN access, not E-TRAN.

FEHPLMN (Equivalent HPLMN)

Used to define equivalent HPMNs, for example if two carriers merge and still have two PLMNs.

FPLMN (Forbidden PLMN list)

A list of PLMNs the subscriber is not permitted to roam to.

HPPLMN (Higher Priority PLMN search period)

How long in seconds to spend between each PLMN/Access Technology in HPLMNwAcT list.

ACC (Access Control Class)

The ACC allows values from 0-15, and determines the access control class of the subscriber.

In the UK the ACC values is used to restrict civilian access to cell phone networks during emergencies.

Ordinary subscribers have ACC numbers in the range 0 – 9. Higher priority users are allocated numbers 12-14.

During an emergency, some or all access classes in the range 0 – 9 are disabled.

This means service would be could be cut off to the public who have ACC value of 0-9, but those like first responders and emergency services would have a higher ACC value and the network would allow them to attach.

AD (Administrative Data)

Like the ACC field the AD field allows operators to drive test networks without valid paying subscribers attaching to the network.

The defined levels are:

’00’ normal operation.
’80’ type approval operations.
’01’ normal operation + specific facilities.
’81’ type approval operations + specific facilities.
’02’ maintenance (off line).
’04’ cell test operation.

GID 1 / 2 – Group Identifier

Two group identifier fields that allow the operator to identify a group of USIMs for a particular application.

SPN (Service Provider Name)

The SPN is an optional field containing the human-readable name of the network.

The SPN allows MVNOs to provide their own USIMs with their name as the operator on the handset.

ECC (Emergency Call Codes)

Codes up to 6 digits long the subscriber is allowed to dial from home screen / in emergency / while not authenticated etc.

MSISDN

Mobile Station International Subscriber Directory Number. The E.164 formatted phone number of the subscriber.

This is optional, as porting may overwrite this, so it doesn’t always match up.

References:

https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/131100_131199/131102/12.05.00_60/ts_131102v120500p.pdf

All About IMS Authentication (AKAv1-MD5) in VoLTE Networks

18/01/2019EPC, IMS / VoLTE, LTE, Mobile Networks, Notes, RFCs & Standards, SDM, Security, SIM Cards, Software, VoIPAKA, AKAv1-MD5, EPC, IMS, LTE, VoLTENick

I recently began integrating IMS Authentication functions into PyHSS, and thought I’d share my notes / research into the authentication used by IMS networks & served by a IMS capable HSS.

There’s very little useful info online on AKAv1-MD5 algorithm, but it’s actually fairly simple to understand.

RFC 2617 introduces two authentication methods for HTTP, one is Plain Text and is as it sounds – the password sent over the wire, the other is using Digest scheme authentication. This is the authentication used in standard SIP MD5 auth which I covered ages back in this post.

Authentication and Key Agreement (AKA) is a method for authentication and key distribution in a EUTRAN network. AKA is challenge-response based using symmetric cryptography. AKA runs on the ISIM function of a USIM card.

I’ve covered the AKA process in my post on USIM/HSS authentication.

The Nonce field is the Base64 encoded version of the RAND value and concatenated with the AUTN token from our AKA response. (Often called the Authentication Vectors).

That’s it!

It’s put in the SIP 401 response by the S-CSCF and sent to the UE. (Note, the Cyperhing Key & Integrity Keys are removed by the P-CSCF and used for IPsec SA establishment.