Contest Winner

@idanronen you need signing to ensure the authentencitity of the messages. Encryption only adds obfuscation.

@kimot thanks you've definitely given to me the right direction to look into.

Looks like my chip info is different and is the following:

esptool.py v2.6
Serial port COM7
Connecting....
Detecting chip type... ESP8266
Chip is ESP8266EX
Features: WiFi
MAC: ec:fa:bc:86:da:e2
Uploading stub...
Running stub...
Stub running...
Manufacturer: 5e
Device: 4014
Detected flash size: 1MB
Hard resetting via RTS pin...

I see that manufacturer 5e is given problems to many people so I've followed the advice I found here https://forum.micropython.org/viewtopic.php?t=3777 to actually solve the issue, specifically flashing with the -fm dout flag (e.g. esptool.py --port COM5 write_flash -fs 1MB -fm dout 0x0 file.bin) and now it works!

Many thanks!

Pretty weird behaviour here. I have two sonoff bought a couple of years ago acting as mqtt gateways with this sketch https://www.mysensors.org/build/sonoff running perfectly fine.

I've recently bought another couple and despite uploading the same sketch it just does not work (the two of them). Sketch and wiring is the same of those working, arduino IDE's settings the same, the output when flashing is the same without errors, the PCB layout is identical (the new model has just 3 screws for the case instead of one but doesn't matter).

After flashing just nothing happens (no serial output, no relay switching when pressing the button, no connection to the mqtt broker). I'd say it is a broken unit but doesn't make sense having two out of two broken and still able to be flashed (I'd have received a timeout error if the chip was completely broken). Tried flashing already multiple times without luck.

Anybody seen a similar behaviour? Any special protection added to the ESP8266 chip in recent models I need to take rid of?

Thanks!

Please provide the documentation required by the CERN Open Hardware License when using said license.

@hek thanks! It took us way more than expected to re-architect all the thing but now that is ready, happy with the result so your positive feedback is appreciated Legacy myHouse issue was mainly around extensibility hence this distributed, plugin-based architecture allowing users to package functionalities and/or contents without me doing any change in the core code. And turning it in a cloud-based service (as an option) could be also really easy. But for now the hope is to build a little community around it so to make it evolve further. Just as a starting point

Done it! (https://www.mysensors.org/controller/egeoffrey). I've already removed the legacy myHouse project and updated the spreadsheet. If there is anything wrong in the changes, just let me know. Do I also need to create a subcategory under https://forum.mysensors.org/category/3/controllers? Thanks!

Thanks all, yes I do have privileges to edit pages. Will work on it and when ready publish directly the changes. Should I face any issue in the process I'll get back here. Thanks again!

During the last year I've invested my spare time in re-designing and re-architecting my old Home Automation project called myHouse which was also acting as a MySensors controller (https://www.mysensors.org/controller/myhouse). Now, I've given the project a brand new name (eGeoffrey - https://www.egeoffrey.com) and despite the basic principles are the same (likewise MySensors support), now is supposed to be way simpler to configure, use, customize and extend. Before doing any change, @AWI is it the correct approach if I delete the existing myHouse entry from the controller section, add a new one for eGeoffrey (since it is replacing it) and do the same with the column of the matrix? (do I need any special permission for editing the spreadsheet?) Thanks!

@zen85 I think @tekka implemented some security functionality in his bootloader but I believe it relies on a personalized atsha204a due to size limitations. And does not support encryption. But I might be out of date on that topic.

@zen85 I do not think so as the simple flags are software based and the size available for the bootloader is very limited. And I do not think the bootloader shares library code base with the MySensors functionality in general so some hacking will be involved to make it theoretically supported and extensive optimization to make it practically supported.