Bluetooth: Reject pairing requests when in non-pairable mode

This patch adds the necessary logic to act accordingly when the
HCI_PAIRABLE flag is not set. In that case PIN code replies as well as
Secure Simple Pairing requests without a NoBonding requirement need to
be rejected.

Signed-off-by: Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@nokia.com>
Signed-off-by: Gustavo F. Padovan <padovan@profusion.mobi>

3 files changed, 71 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/include/net/bluetooth/hci.h b/include/net/bluetooth/hci.h
index f0c25b5ba4b2..65cab137e19f 100644
--- a/include/net/bluetooth/hci.h
+++ b/include/net/bluetooth/hci.h
@@ -384,6 +384,12 @@ struct hci_cp_reject_sync_conn_req {
 	__u8     reason;
 } __packed;
 
+#define HCI_OP_IO_CAPABILITY_NEG_REPLY	0x0434
+struct hci_cp_io_capability_neg_reply {
+	bdaddr_t bdaddr;
+	__u8     reason;
+} __packed;
+
 #define HCI_OP_SNIFF_MODE		0x0803
 struct hci_cp_sniff_mode {
 	__le16   handle;
@@ -840,6 +846,14 @@ struct hci_ev_io_capa_request {
 	bdaddr_t bdaddr;
 } __packed;
 
+#define HCI_EV_IO_CAPA_REPLY		0x32
+struct hci_ev_io_capa_reply {
+	bdaddr_t bdaddr;
+	__u8     capability;
+	__u8     oob_data;
+	__u8     authentication;
+} __packed;
+
 #define HCI_EV_SIMPLE_PAIR_COMPLETE	0x36
 struct hci_ev_simple_pair_complete {
 	__u8     status;
diff --git a/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h b/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h
index 8ee0b8bac77c..dc8084a139ed 100644
--- a/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h
+++ b/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h
@@ -201,6 +201,10 @@ struct hci_conn {
 	__u16            disc_timeout;
 	unsigned long	 pend;
 
+	__u8		remote_cap;
+	__u8		remote_oob;
+	__u8		remote_auth;
+
 	unsigned int	 sent;
 
 	struct sk_buff_head data_q;
diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
index a8a38f17ef78..cf3014ae00e4 100644
--- a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
+++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
@@ -1595,6 +1595,10 @@ static inline void hci_pin_code_request_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff
 		hci_conn_put(conn);
 	}
 
+	if (!test_bit(HCI_PAIRABLE, &hdev->flags))
+		hci_send_cmd(hdev, HCI_OP_PIN_CODE_NEG_REPLY,
+					sizeof(ev->bdaddr), &ev->bdaddr);
+
 	hci_dev_unlock(hdev);
 }
 
@@ -1885,9 +1889,52 @@ static inline void hci_io_capa_request_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff
 	hci_dev_lock(hdev);
 
 	conn = hci_conn_hash_lookup_ba(hdev, ACL_LINK, &ev->bdaddr);
-	if (conn)
-		hci_conn_hold(conn);
+	if (!conn)
+		goto unlock;
+
+	hci_conn_hold(conn);
+
+	if (!test_bit(HCI_MGMT, &hdev->flags))
+		goto unlock;
+
+	if (test_bit(HCI_PAIRABLE, &hdev->flags) ||
+			(conn->remote_auth & ~0x01) == HCI_AT_NO_BONDING) {
+		/* FIXME: Do IO capa response based on information
+		 * provided through the management interface */
+	} else {
+		struct hci_cp_io_capability_neg_reply cp;
+
+		bacpy(&cp.bdaddr, &ev->bdaddr);
+		cp.reason = 0x16; /* Pairing not allowed */
 
+		hci_send_cmd(hdev, HCI_OP_IO_CAPABILITY_NEG_REPLY,
+							sizeof(cp), &cp);
+	}
+
+unlock:
+	hci_dev_unlock(hdev);
+}
+
+static inline void hci_io_capa_reply_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
+{
+	struct hci_ev_io_capa_reply *ev = (void *) skb->data;
+	struct hci_conn *conn;
+
+	BT_DBG("%s", hdev->name);
+
+	hci_dev_lock(hdev);
+
+	conn = hci_conn_hash_lookup_ba(hdev, ACL_LINK, &ev->bdaddr);
+	if (!conn)
+		goto unlock;
+
+	hci_conn_hold(conn);
+
+	conn->remote_cap = ev->capability;
+	conn->remote_oob = ev->oob_data;
+	conn->remote_auth = ev->authentication;
+
+unlock:
 	hci_dev_unlock(hdev);
 }
 
@@ -2051,6 +2098,10 @@ void hci_event_packet(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
 		hci_io_capa_request_evt(hdev, skb);
 		break;
 
+	case HCI_EV_IO_CAPA_REPLY:
+		hci_io_capa_reply_evt(hdev, skb);
+		break;
+
 	case HCI_EV_SIMPLE_PAIR_COMPLETE:
 		hci_simple_pair_complete_evt(hdev, skb);
 		break;