Contents

Talk:Bluetooth: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:20, 28 July 2009

Telecommunications Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

As a developer, I think it might be very handy if some images like http://progtutorials.tripod.com/Bluetooth_Technology_files/image003.jpg and http://progtutorials.tripod.com/Bluetooth_Technology_files/image005.jpg were added. since it's somewhat vague layered in comparison to 802.11

I saw no mention of the rates of which you can transfer data with bluetooth. I seem to average about 38kb/s which was surprisingly slow when compared to other methods off transferring data.

In the ICP section:

"Intercom Profile (ICP)

This is often referred to as the walkie-talkie profile. It is another TCS based profile, relying on SCO to carry the audio. It is proposed to allow voice calls between two Bluetooth capable handsets, over Bluetooth."

It say this is "...another TCS based profile". However, TCS is not defined on the page, or linked.

The Security Concerns section in the article indicates that EPR allows the identification of a security attack v.s. normal operation.

The security attack is turning encryption off, and to turn it off an ACL link must have encryption enabled, which means that the ACL link must have been authenticated (by pairing). So the device "attacking" already is receiving the data and so exposing it to eavesdropping isn't really an attack, it is a poor implementation. EPR does allow the host guarding against these poor implementations to respond quicker, but with limited improvement on security.

This is what I think, but I thought I should solicit feedback before making any change to the article.

--Jas203 (talk) 11:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple of issues with the security section. One of them has to do with the PIN-cracking, which I know was done (though not released) by Josh Wright around the spring of 2006 at a SANS conference in Orlando. The section is better than it used to be, but still needs some improvement, though I'm not really the one to be able to address it accurately enough myself. Martin Blank (talk) 05:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree there are issues that are still true (such as the PIN cracking, and other attacks) - however I thought this particular (EPR) based discussion was potential distracting from actual issues. I'll have a think about how it could be improved. --Jas203 (talk) 18:32, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bluetooth is limited to 100m range by design because of TX/RX timing constraints?

I came across a posted comment along the lines of "Bluetooth range is limited to 30 or 100 meters (regardless of antenna or transmit power) because timing in the electronics limits how far a signal can travel before it's ignored because of how a bluetooth device switches between Tx and Rx."

Is this true?

(and please do not remove this question. This could be a very important aspect of bluetooth technology)