Come on, guys! All ya have to do, when you are satified that the code is secure- is to break off the PGCK or PGSD pin. --Bob Ben Hencke wrote: > I figured it is possible, but I was hoping for it to be more expensive > than $5k or a homemade programmer. > > It is something I have been coding and recoding and optimizing and > reopimizing for 6 months now, so I would like to think it would cost > more than $5k to reverse-engineer. (I could be fooling myself on that > point, but its better than not trying). > > Thanks all for the info. > Ben > > > > On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 20:00:12 -0400, M. Adam Davis wrote: > >>The short answer is: >>Yes, it's possible to read the memory contents of any PIC. >> >>The caveat being that it often requires large resources to do so. >> >>I use a baseline for my protection: If the product is not worth $5,000 >>to break, then the PIC protrection is good enough. If it's worth $5,000 >>to someone to get my program then I may want to look at more robust >>protection methods. It may cost vastly more for various chips, and it >>may be trivial for others - it's just a simple rule of thumb I use. >> >>Except for cryptographic keys, there are very few programs you could >>make for a PIC that could not be duplicated with non-invasive reverse >>engineering by a knowledgable programmer. Tell me what the device does, >>and I can duplicate it without having seen the chip. Chances are good >>it'll cost you a lot less than $5,000, and it's not illegal (unless, for >>instance, parts are patented and licenses not paid). >> >>But these issues are not often discussed on the list, primarily because >>most here have a vested interest in keeping any easy exploits from >>entering common knowledge, and partly because you can't know who to >>trust and the list is archived so you can't say anything without it >>becoming public knowledge. >> >>Also, be aware that those who engage in code protect breaking know that >>they can take your money and return nothing with little fear of >>successful legal reprisal. >> >>-Adam >> >> >> >>Ben Hencke wrote: >> >> >>>Hi all, >>>I am using a 12f629 with code protection. I have read and seen places >>>that advertise reverse engineering or "recovery" of secured devices. >>> >>>I imagine this would be somewhat easy with a ROM mask type device, if >>>you could pull the top off, a good enough microscope could see the >>>ROM. >>> >>>Is there a way to "read" flash based devices in a similar manner? How >>>practical would it be for them to connect probes and/or bypass the >>>protection curcuitry or maybe just unset the CP bit? Is an OTP any >>>different than a flash in this reguard? >>> >>>I have even heard (on piclist archives) of special (read: expensive) >>>programmers that violate the chips in such a way that it could read >>>the code. >>> >>>I don't want to do this, I just want to know if anyone knows if it is >>>possible and how easy or common a practice it is. >>> >>>Thanks, >>> Ben >>> >>>-- >>>http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: >>>[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>-- >>http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: >>[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads >> > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics > (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics > > -- Replier: Most attachments rejected -------------- Bob Axtell PIC Hardware & Firmware Dev http://beam.to/baxtell 1-520-219-2363 -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics