Clearing Up the Flipper Zero

A recent article from ABC News reported The Queensland Police are concerned about Flipper Zero, as it could be used to hack car keys and security systems. This is all misinformation and I am here to clear this up!

---

What is a Flipper Zero?

The Flipper Zero, as described in its Kickstarter ad listing, is a compact, multifunctional tool tailored for penetration testers and hardware enthusiasts, cleverly packaged in a playful, toy-like form. Its primary purpose is to interface with and manipulate radio frequencies like RFID, NFC, and Sub-1GHz signals.

The term “hack” is used in a nuanced sense here. Contrary to Hollywood portrayals, the Flipper Zero isn’t a conventional hacking device. Instead, it specializes in intercepting signals, and if the underlying protocol is susceptible, it attempts decryption.

Can it hack car keys and security systems?

In essence, yes, the Flipper Zero can potentially “hack” car keys and security systems. However, its efficacy in modern car systems, equipped with rolling code key fobs generating unique codes per activation, is limited. Intercepting such encrypted communications isn’t feasible for the Flipper Zero. Even if it could capture these signals, the use of of rolling codes and the proximity required for interception pose significant obstacles. Furthermore, modern vehicles typically necessitate the physical presence of the key fob for ignition.

Incidents of car theft, often involving replay attacks, typically employ specialized keyless repeater kits, distinct from devices like the Flipper Zero. These kits intercept and replicate key fob signals, albeit at a substantially higher cost.

Conversely, older vehicles with static codes, predating the 1990s, are more susceptible to interception. While theoretically plausible for the Flipper Zero to intercept such signals, its operational limitation to sub-1GHz frequencies restricts its applicability. Notably, there have been no documented cases of car theft involving a Flipper Zero.

Regarding security systems like garage or apartment entry fobs, the Flipper Zero can indeed duplicate and clone NFC or RFID-based fobs and key cards. This underscores the vulnerabilities inherent in such systems, underscoring the imperative for companies to bolster their product security protocols.

Are there legitimate uses?

Personally owning a Flipper Zero, I employ it for educational purposes, exploring radio frequency intricacies and device vulnerabilities. For instance, I successfully cloned my garage and apartment access fobs, exemplifying a practical, real-world use case. This prevented the need for an additional fob, sparing considerable expense.

Moreover, its functionalities extend beyond mere duplication. Featuring an infrared remote control and a noteworthy Bad USB function akin to the Rubber Ducky, it facilitates automation of repetitive IT tasks, enhancing efficiency and productivity.

Would a ban solve this issue?

I do not believe that a ban on the Flipper Zero will address underlying security concerns. Comparable devices offering similar or augmented capabilities exist, and the project’s open-source nature enables replication. Instead, advocating for updated legislation prohibiting the sale of vulnerable or insecure devices would incentivize the adoption of more secure alternatives.

In conclusion, rather than vilifying the tool itself, emphasis should be placed on rectifying the pervasive issue of insecure and vulnerable products.