Sorry I should have been clearer... the PIC in the project does 
virtually nothing.  The IP is the switcher design.  The point is to make 
it hard to identify what chip is being used.  I could care less if the 
PIC code is extracted.

Mike, do you have firsthand experience with a product that was de-potted 
and cloned, or are your comments anecdotal?  I personally don't see how 
this design is going to be quickly reverse-engineered without IC 
markings on the key part.

J


Mauricio Jancic wrote:

> Yep. I agree... Braking the code of a pic cost between 1K and 3K U$ dollars,
> depending on the chip. The process takes 1 week..... That's a lot less that
> what you would need to pay for a full development, if you want to do the
> thinks the wrong way.
> 
> Regards, 
> 
> 
> Mauricio Jancic
> Janso Desarrollos - Microchip Consultants Program Member
> info@janso.com.ar
> www.janso.com.ar
> (54) 11 - 4542 - 3519
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of
> Mike Harrison
> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 5:58 AM
> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
> Subject: Re: [EE]: Potting compound to protect IP?
> 
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 21:43:41 -0400, you wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hello all,
>>
>>I've just finished a product that uses a specialized dc/dc controller 
>>(designed for a wholly unrelated field) with some further tweaks to 
>>solve a particular thorny problem.
>>
>>It took three major redesigns to get here, 100s of hours, etc.
>>
>>But... it could be easily copied.  And can't be patented.
>>
>>So... at the very least I'm going to (carefully) sand off the markings 
>>on the IC.
>>
>>But it would be great to seal everything up as well.  Only the dc/dc 
>>section need be protected, there is no need to encapsulate everything.
>>Ideally just a tablespoon of viscous goo poured over it.
>>
>>Now I realize there are limits to what can be protected, the goal is to 
>>make it hard enough that casual poking around won't yield any clues.
>>The product is a specialized enough thing that there aren't many 
>>companies in the business field that would be interested in it, so it 
>>doesn't need to withstand some concerted, well-equipped "attack".
>>
>>Has anyone been in this situation before?
>>
>>Any advice appreciated!
>>Thanks
>>Jesse
> 
> 
> Sanding off numbers and/or Potting is a complete waste of time for stopping
> people copying, and adds to your build costs on every unit.
> It may add a few hours or days to the time it takes someone to do it but if
> they have decided to do it they will do it anyway.
>   
> 
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership
> options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
> 
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist