Skip to content
  • MySensors
  • OpenHardware.io
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo
  1. Home
  2. General Discussion
  3. Signing or encrypting the data

Signing or encrypting the data

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
38 Posts 9 Posters 8.7k Views 9 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • AnticimexA Anticimex

    @meddie a signature takes up part of the available payload space. For nrf24 it is 27 bytes. For a signature to be efficient it needs to be reasonably large, say have the available payload. That leaves have the amount left for binary data. OTA require MANY packages to transfer a typical sketch. For each package a nonce exchange will take place. For this reason, signing is not used for streams. And it does not have to be. A stream should always be checksummed in order to be fully validated. A signature only needs to cover that checksum.

    ahmedadelhosniA Offline
    ahmedadelhosniA Offline
    ahmedadelhosni
    wrote on last edited by ahmedadelhosni
    #25

    @Anticimex said:

    OTA require MANY packages to transfer a typical sketch. For each package a nonce exchange will take place. For this reason, signing is not used for streams. And it does not have to be. A stream should always be checksummed in order to be fully validated. A signature only needs to cover that checksum.

    Please bear with me. I just want to be sure I understand it well.
    "For this reason, signing is not used for streams." Means that signing is not used when uploading a sketch. Does this lead to a hacker replacing my sketch ?

    A stream should always be checksummed in order to be fully validated

    Checksum will make sure that the sketch is transferred correctly to avoid data corruption, NOT security, correct ?

    A signature only needs to cover that checksum

    So you propose that a signature must be added with the checksum for security, correct ??

    So in brief. OTA is not secured at the moment and the code can be replaced easily with an unsigned one, correct ?

    Thanks.

    AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • AnticimexA Offline
      AnticimexA Offline
      Anticimex
      Contest Winner
      wrote on last edited by
      #26

      You are perfectly correct. But if you reach my level of paranoia, you will find that encryption provides little comfort. But you may use it to your hearts content of course.

      Do you feel secure today? No? Start requiring some signatures and feel better tomorrow ;)

      1 Reply Last reply
      1
      • ahmedadelhosniA ahmedadelhosni

        @Anticimex said:

        OTA require MANY packages to transfer a typical sketch. For each package a nonce exchange will take place. For this reason, signing is not used for streams. And it does not have to be. A stream should always be checksummed in order to be fully validated. A signature only needs to cover that checksum.

        Please bear with me. I just want to be sure I understand it well.
        "For this reason, signing is not used for streams." Means that signing is not used when uploading a sketch. Does this lead to a hacker replacing my sketch ?

        A stream should always be checksummed in order to be fully validated

        Checksum will make sure that the sketch is transferred correctly to avoid data corruption, NOT security, correct ?

        A signature only needs to cover that checksum

        So you propose that a signature must be added with the checksum for security, correct ??

        So in brief. OTA is not secured at the moment and the code can be replaced easily with an unsigned one, correct ?

        Thanks.

        AnticimexA Offline
        AnticimexA Offline
        Anticimex
        Contest Winner
        wrote on last edited by
        #27

        @ahmedadelhosni said:

        Please bear with me. I just want to be sure I understand it well.
        "For this reason, signing is not used for streams." Means that signing is not used when uploading a sketch. Does this lead to a hacker replacing my sketch ?

        No, I stated that the sketch is checksummed and that checksum is signed. So no, a hacker won't (probably) be able to replace your sketch. Lest he is able to produce one that yields the exact same checksum AND manages to inject it so that the signed checksum is arrived in a timely manner for the receiver to take it into account.

        Checksum will make sure that the sketch is transferred correctly so to avoid data corruption, correct ?

        "Sure" in this aspect is a very relative term. But yes, that is it's purpose.

        So you propose that a signature must be added with the checksum for security, correct ??

        No, I say it is added if signing is enabled. But please be aware that the current version of MYSBootloader does not support signing. Future versions will do.

        So in brief. OTA is not secured at the moment and the code can be replaced easily with an unsigned one, correct ?

        No, as I said, dualoptiboot should be secure. But the use of CRC as checksum is not as secure as SHA256 would be, so the security is not as good as it can be.

        Do you feel secure today? No? Start requiring some signatures and feel better tomorrow ;)

        ahmedadelhosniA M 2 Replies Last reply
        2
        • AnticimexA Anticimex

          @ahmedadelhosni said:

          Please bear with me. I just want to be sure I understand it well.
          "For this reason, signing is not used for streams." Means that signing is not used when uploading a sketch. Does this lead to a hacker replacing my sketch ?

          No, I stated that the sketch is checksummed and that checksum is signed. So no, a hacker won't (probably) be able to replace your sketch. Lest he is able to produce one that yields the exact same checksum AND manages to inject it so that the signed checksum is arrived in a timely manner for the receiver to take it into account.

          Checksum will make sure that the sketch is transferred correctly so to avoid data corruption, correct ?

          "Sure" in this aspect is a very relative term. But yes, that is it's purpose.

          So you propose that a signature must be added with the checksum for security, correct ??

          No, I say it is added if signing is enabled. But please be aware that the current version of MYSBootloader does not support signing. Future versions will do.

          So in brief. OTA is not secured at the moment and the code can be replaced easily with an unsigned one, correct ?

          No, as I said, dualoptiboot should be secure. But the use of CRC as checksum is not as secure as SHA256 would be, so the security is not as good as it can be.

          ahmedadelhosniA Offline
          ahmedadelhosniA Offline
          ahmedadelhosni
          wrote on last edited by
          #28

          @Anticimex Great. now it is very clear :) Thanks a lot

          I will order all ICs soon and test this in real life :)

          M 1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • ahmedadelhosniA ahmedadelhosni

            @Anticimex Great. now it is very clear :) Thanks a lot

            I will order all ICs soon and test this in real life :)

            M Offline
            M Offline
            meddie
            wrote on last edited by
            #29

            @ahmedadelhosni
            Fine, please let stay me informed, because i am very interested too.

            ahmedadelhosniA 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • M meddie

              @ahmedadelhosni
              Fine, please let stay me informed, because i am very interested too.

              ahmedadelhosniA Offline
              ahmedadelhosniA Offline
              ahmedadelhosni
              wrote on last edited by ahmedadelhosni
              #30

              @meddie Sure. Maybe by the end of that month I may begin in OTA process.
              I hope I can find good documentation :)

              M 1 Reply Last reply
              1
              • AnticimexA Anticimex

                @ahmedadelhosni said:

                Please bear with me. I just want to be sure I understand it well.
                "For this reason, signing is not used for streams." Means that signing is not used when uploading a sketch. Does this lead to a hacker replacing my sketch ?

                No, I stated that the sketch is checksummed and that checksum is signed. So no, a hacker won't (probably) be able to replace your sketch. Lest he is able to produce one that yields the exact same checksum AND manages to inject it so that the signed checksum is arrived in a timely manner for the receiver to take it into account.

                Checksum will make sure that the sketch is transferred correctly so to avoid data corruption, correct ?

                "Sure" in this aspect is a very relative term. But yes, that is it's purpose.

                So you propose that a signature must be added with the checksum for security, correct ??

                No, I say it is added if signing is enabled. But please be aware that the current version of MYSBootloader does not support signing. Future versions will do.

                So in brief. OTA is not secured at the moment and the code can be replaced easily with an unsigned one, correct ?

                No, as I said, dualoptiboot should be secure. But the use of CRC as checksum is not as secure as SHA256 would be, so the security is not as good as it can be.

                M Offline
                M Offline
                meddie
                wrote on last edited by
                #31

                @Anticimex

                one more question: is it possble to run the atmega with dualoptiboot bootloader at 1MHz. For battery use. And use the the encryption and signing and OTA.

                AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • ahmedadelhosniA ahmedadelhosni

                  @meddie Sure. Maybe by the end of that month I may begin in OTA process.
                  I hope I can find good documentation :)

                  M Offline
                  M Offline
                  meddie
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #32

                  @ahmedadelhosni
                  fine, thank you in advanced

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • M meddie

                    @Anticimex

                    one more question: is it possble to run the atmega with dualoptiboot bootloader at 1MHz. For battery use. And use the the encryption and signing and OTA.

                    AnticimexA Offline
                    AnticimexA Offline
                    Anticimex
                    Contest Winner
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #33

                    @meddie Please direct OTA questions to @tekka He can better explain what is supported in which solution and when any unsupported features will be available if planned.
                    Generally, 1MHz offer little battery benefit over 8MHz.

                    Do you feel secure today? No? Start requiring some signatures and feel better tomorrow ;)

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    1
                    • tbowmoT Offline
                      tbowmoT Offline
                      tbowmo
                      Admin
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #34

                      for a MCU that never enters sleep states, running at 1Mhz can save you some power, compared to running at 8Mhz. But if you plan to enter sleep state, and only wake up periodically, you won't gain that much. As sleepmode current is the same for both 1Mhz and 8Mhz.

                      One can also argue that if you are using 1Mhz, then the program execution will be longer, compared to 8Mhz. So when it wakes up from sleep mode, it will stay awake for a longer time, if running at 1Mhz, compared to 8Mhz.

                      ahmedadelhosniA 1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      • tbowmoT tbowmo

                        for a MCU that never enters sleep states, running at 1Mhz can save you some power, compared to running at 8Mhz. But if you plan to enter sleep state, and only wake up periodically, you won't gain that much. As sleepmode current is the same for both 1Mhz and 8Mhz.

                        One can also argue that if you are using 1Mhz, then the program execution will be longer, compared to 8Mhz. So when it wakes up from sleep mode, it will stay awake for a longer time, if running at 1Mhz, compared to 8Mhz.

                        ahmedadelhosniA Offline
                        ahmedadelhosniA Offline
                        ahmedadelhosni
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #35

                        @tbowmo Good points. Neven thought about it as I flash 1Mhz always.
                        I may try power consumption using 8Mhz in a new sensor node.
                        Thanks for the info.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • M Offline
                          M Offline
                          meddie
                          wrote on last edited by meddie
                          #36

                          yes me too. i will try my test setup to burn the bootloader at 8 mhz. It would make much easier.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • SoloamS Offline
                            SoloamS Offline
                            Soloam
                            Hardware Contributor
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #37

                            Any one tried to run a atmega with encryption and software signing? And with Hardware Signing?

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • AnticimexA Offline
                              AnticimexA Offline
                              Anticimex
                              Contest Winner
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #38

                              Yes.

                              Do you feel secure today? No? Start requiring some signatures and feel better tomorrow ;)

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              19

                              Online

                              11.7k

                              Users

                              11.2k

                              Topics

                              113.1k

                              Posts


                              Copyright 2025 TBD   |   Forum Guidelines   |   Privacy Policy   |   Terms of Service
                              • Login

                              • Don't have an account? Register

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • MySensors
                              • OpenHardware.io
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular