On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 11:52:42 -0400, you wrote:

>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.

Unless the 'key part' is particularly obscure, once the basic function and pinout has been
determined, it is usually not hard to figure out what it is with a bit of searching. 
If someone is really determined, they may also try de-capping it to establish the manufacturer -
chips quite often have makers marks on the die. 

I have de-potted a few things myself, mostly for curiosity - never took more than a day or so.
Potting can be a real nightmare for production, and is best avoided unless necessary for some other
reason than an ineffective attempt at improving security. 

 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist