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. Development
  3. software AES encryption for NRF24

software AES encryption for NRF24

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Development
43 Posts 9 Posters 21.3k Views 12 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.
  • FotoFieberF Offline
    FotoFieberF Offline
    FotoFieber
    Hardware Contributor
    wrote on last edited by
    #15

    Compiling AES with an ESP8266 fails. I had to change AES_config.h (in drivers/AES):

    #include <pgmspace.h>

    instead of

    #include <avr/pgmspace.h>

    hekH 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • FotoFieberF FotoFieber

      Compiling AES with an ESP8266 fails. I had to change AES_config.h (in drivers/AES):

      #include <pgmspace.h>

      instead of

      #include <avr/pgmspace.h>

      hekH Offline
      hekH Offline
      hek
      Admin
      wrote on last edited by
      #16

      @FotoFieber said:

      Compiling AES with an ESP8266 fails. I had to change AES_config.h (in drivers/AES):

      #include <pgmspace.h>

      instead of

      #include <avr/pgmspace.h>

      Thanks, I'll fix.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • hekH hek

        ENC + encrytion + soft-signing fails :(

        Sketch uses 34,244 bytes (106%) of program storage space. Maximum is 32,256 bytes.
        Global variables use 1,912 bytes (93%) of dynamic memory, leaving 136 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2,048 bytes.

        FotoFieberF Offline
        FotoFieberF Offline
        FotoFieber
        Hardware Contributor
        wrote on last edited by
        #17

        @hek

        @hek said:

        ENC + encrytion + soft-signing fails :(

        Sketch uses 34,244 bytes (106%) of program storage space. Maximum is 32,256 bytes.
        Global variables use 1,912 bytes (93%) of dynamic memory, leaving 136 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2,048 bytes.

        Yesterday I made a setup with a ESP8266 gateway and a mega2560 as a secure relay actuator with encryption and signing. There are quite small mega2560 but a sensbender mega2560 would be desireable. :)

        ENC + encryption + soft signing is working! :relaxed:

        AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • FotoFieberF FotoFieber

          @hek

          @hek said:

          ENC + encrytion + soft-signing fails :(

          Sketch uses 34,244 bytes (106%) of program storage space. Maximum is 32,256 bytes.
          Global variables use 1,912 bytes (93%) of dynamic memory, leaving 136 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2,048 bytes.

          Yesterday I made a setup with a ESP8266 gateway and a mega2560 as a secure relay actuator with encryption and signing. There are quite small mega2560 but a sensbender mega2560 would be desireable. :)

          ENC + encryption + soft signing is working! :relaxed:

          AnticimexA Offline
          AnticimexA Offline
          Anticimex
          Contest Winner
          wrote on last edited by Anticimex
          #18

          @FotoFieber with a SenseBender, there is no reason for soft signing. It should have a ATSHA204A chip. But nice that you have working setup :)

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

          FotoFieberF 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • AnticimexA Anticimex

            @FotoFieber with a SenseBender, there is no reason for soft signing. It should have a ATSHA204A chip. But nice that you have working setup :)

            FotoFieberF Offline
            FotoFieberF Offline
            FotoFieber
            Hardware Contributor
            wrote on last edited by
            #19

            @Anticimex said:

            @FotoFieber with a SenseBender, there is no reason for soft signing. It should have a ATSHA204A chip. But nice that you have working setup :)

            Yes, but encryption and ATSHA204A is to big for the SenseBender... :(

            AnticimexA ximinezX 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • FotoFieberF FotoFieber

              @Anticimex said:

              @FotoFieber with a SenseBender, there is no reason for soft signing. It should have a ATSHA204A chip. But nice that you have working setup :)

              Yes, but encryption and ATSHA204A is to big for the SenseBender... :(

              AnticimexA Offline
              AnticimexA Offline
              Anticimex
              Contest Winner
              wrote on last edited by
              #20

              @FotoFieber ah. Bummer :(

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

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • FotoFieberF FotoFieber

                @Anticimex said:

                @FotoFieber with a SenseBender, there is no reason for soft signing. It should have a ATSHA204A chip. But nice that you have working setup :)

                Yes, but encryption and ATSHA204A is to big for the SenseBender... :(

                ximinezX Offline
                ximinezX Offline
                ximinez
                wrote on last edited by
                #21

                @FotoFieber said:

                @Anticimex said:

                @FotoFieber with a SenseBender, there is no reason for soft signing. It should have a ATSHA204A chip. But nice that you have working setup :)

                Yes, but encryption and ATSHA204A is to big for the SenseBender... :(

                Old thread, but... In the dev branch, there's a RF24 refactor that is much smaller. With that, and removing test-mode, there's plenty of space on the sensebender:

                #define MY_RADIO_NRF24
                #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204
                #define MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES
                #define MY_SIGNING_NODE_WHITELISTING {{.nodeId = GATEWAY_ADDRESS,.serial = {0xBO,0xGU,0xSK,0xEY,0xZZ,0xFC,0xAD,0x04,0xD1}}}
                #define MY_OTA_FIRMWARE_FEATURE
                #define MY_RF24_ENABLE_ENCRYPTION

                Sketch uses 23,196 bytes (75%) of program storage space. Maximum is 30,720 bytes.
                Global variables use 1,386 bytes (67%) of dynamic memory, leaving 662 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2,048 bytes.

                Even with debug it's only at 91%.

                My W5100 gateway ends up at 107% with AES though, but it fits (with 592 bytes to spare) if I use a static address instead of DHCP.
                Serial Gateway ends up at only 65%.

                alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
                2
                • ximinezX ximinez

                  @FotoFieber said:

                  @Anticimex said:

                  @FotoFieber with a SenseBender, there is no reason for soft signing. It should have a ATSHA204A chip. But nice that you have working setup :)

                  Yes, but encryption and ATSHA204A is to big for the SenseBender... :(

                  Old thread, but... In the dev branch, there's a RF24 refactor that is much smaller. With that, and removing test-mode, there's plenty of space on the sensebender:

                  #define MY_RADIO_NRF24
                  #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204
                  #define MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES
                  #define MY_SIGNING_NODE_WHITELISTING {{.nodeId = GATEWAY_ADDRESS,.serial = {0xBO,0xGU,0xSK,0xEY,0xZZ,0xFC,0xAD,0x04,0xD1}}}
                  #define MY_OTA_FIRMWARE_FEATURE
                  #define MY_RF24_ENABLE_ENCRYPTION

                  Sketch uses 23,196 bytes (75%) of program storage space. Maximum is 30,720 bytes.
                  Global variables use 1,386 bytes (67%) of dynamic memory, leaving 662 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2,048 bytes.

                  Even with debug it's only at 91%.

                  My W5100 gateway ends up at 107% with AES though, but it fits (with 592 bytes to spare) if I use a static address instead of DHCP.
                  Serial Gateway ends up at only 65%.

                  alexsh1A Offline
                  alexsh1A Offline
                  alexsh1
                  wrote on last edited by alexsh1
                  #22

                  @ximinez RF24 refactor - do you mean RF24 inside the MySensors folder? I tried it but still out of luck:

                  Sketch uses 31,396 bytes (102%) of program storage space. Maximum is 30,720 bytes.
Global variables use 1,762 bytes (86%) of dynamic memory, leaving 286 bytes for local variables.
                  AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • alexsh1A alexsh1

                    @ximinez RF24 refactor - do you mean RF24 inside the MySensors folder? I tried it but still out of luck:

                    Sketch uses 31,396 bytes (102%) of program storage space. Maximum is 30,720 bytes.
Global variables use 1,762 bytes (86%) of dynamic memory, leaving 286 bytes for local variables.
                    AnticimexA Offline
                    AnticimexA Offline
                    Anticimex
                    Contest Winner
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #23

                    @alexsh1 from development branch, not master. 2.0.0-beta. Rf24 driver on that branch has been significantly optimized (together with other parts of the library).

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

                    alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • AnticimexA Anticimex

                      @alexsh1 from development branch, not master. 2.0.0-beta. Rf24 driver on that branch has been significantly optimized (together with other parts of the library).

                      alexsh1A Offline
                      alexsh1A Offline
                      alexsh1
                      wrote on last edited by alexsh1
                      #24

                      @Anticimex Thanks for heads up - I think I messed up different versions though I remember unpacking "Arduino-development". I deleted the whole folder and unzipped the files again and voila:

                      Sketch uses 28,228 bytes (91%) of program storage space. Maximum is 30,720 bytes.
Global variables use 1,462 bytes (71%) of dynamic memory, leaving 586 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2,048 bytes.

                      UPDATE: It turned out DEBUG took a lot of memory (DEBUG AND SIGNING DEBUG)

                      FotoFieberF 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • alexsh1A alexsh1

                        @Anticimex Thanks for heads up - I think I messed up different versions though I remember unpacking "Arduino-development". I deleted the whole folder and unzipped the files again and voila:

                        Sketch uses 28,228 bytes (91%) of program storage space. Maximum is 30,720 bytes.
Global variables use 1,462 bytes (71%) of dynamic memory, leaving 586 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 2,048 bytes.

                        UPDATE: It turned out DEBUG took a lot of memory (DEBUG AND SIGNING DEBUG)

                        FotoFieberF Offline
                        FotoFieberF Offline
                        FotoFieber
                        Hardware Contributor
                        wrote on last edited by FotoFieber
                        #25

                        @alexsh1
                        @Anticimex

                        Just tried

                        #define MY_RADIO_NRF24
#define MY_SIGNING_SOFT
#define MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES
#define MY_RF24_ENABLE_ENCRYPTION

                        This was working in the old dev branch but doesn't work for me anymore. Did you have luck with the combination of signing and encryption?

                        n׌�Ox>�XܚMZ������t��ֵ���<��
�=�a�WY=��VP����E�P�pStarting repeater (RNNRAS, 2.0.0)
TSM:INIT
TSM:RADIO:OK
TSP:ASSIGNID:OK (ID=15)
TSM:FPAR
TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-255-255 s=255,c=3,t=7,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,ft=0,st=bc:
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=8,pt=1,l=1,sg=0:0
Skipping security for command 3 type 8
TSP:MSG:FPAR RES (ID=0, dist=0)
TSP:MSG:PAR OK (ID=0, dist=1)
TSM:FPAR:OK
TSM:ID
TSM:CHKID:OK (ID=15)
TSM:UPL
TSP:PING:SEND (dest=0)
Skipping security for command 3 type 24
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=24,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,ft=0,st=fail:1
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=25,pt=1,l=1,sg=0:1
Skipping security for command 3 type 25
TSP:MSG:PONG RECV (hops=1)
TSP:CHKUPL:OK
TSM:UPL:OK
TSM:READY
Signing required
Skipping security for command 3 type 15
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=15,pt=6,l=2,sg=0,ft=1,st=fail:0101
Failed to transmit signing presentation!Waiting for GW to send signing preferences...
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=15,pt=6,l=2,sg=0:0101
Skipping security for command 3 type 15
Mark node 0 as one that require signed messages
Mark node 0 as one that do not require whitelisting
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,ft=2,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,ft=4,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=0:972DE10483D0864680CE821987E5823ABAEF8435F971670F04
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F00060310FF
Current nonce: 972DE10483D0864680CE821987E5823ABAEF8435F971670F04AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: 7922F4E571510EC46BD3CAAF37A1C1627BAE2562BA0ADC210173076854649826
Signature in message: 0122F4E571510EC46BD3CAAF37A1C1627BAE2562BA0ADC2101
Message signed
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=0:59321F17D680FFDC461270BD2C22F77FBC6FF6DE90DD9A34E6
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F00060310FF
Current nonce: 59321F17D680FFDC461270BD2C22F77FBC6FF6DE90DD9A34E6AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: 09031876715AD7ADBC81671982D07A46122D564110C59880AB733AACB111289E
Signature in message: 01031876715AD7ADBC81671982D07A46122D564110C59880AB
Message signed
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1,ft=6,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1,ft=8,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=1:24AB30408F0D10A7DB4CE357B22C908ED2438638C567DF52AE
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F00060310FF
Current nonce: 24AB30408F0D10A7DB4CE357B22C908ED2438638C567DF52AEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: C2B0487B88AD8AE2FD7FB63C21E841324ED48975681EB881A7EC556D74637B33
Signature in message: 01B0487B88AD8AE2FD7FB63C21E841324ED48975681EB881A7
Message signed
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=1:4CDF80D7AAF5358B4DA616FBB1556569F68818F331C6C681F3
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F00060310FF
Current nonce: 4CDF80D7AAF5358B4DA616FBB1556569F68818F331C6C681F3AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: C12B5B8BD5EA6DD142908FBB02A06933E3FFBC399876B8B52E30BA9A1A66B4FC
Signature in message: 012B5B8BD5EA6DD142908FBB02A06933E3FFBC399876B8B52E
Message signed
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=1,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1,ft=10,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
!TSM:UPL FAIL, SNP
TSM:FPAR
TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-255-255 s=255,c=3,t=7,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,ft=0,st=bc:
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=1:0EEFA88D4FB45539A0B20C586D989BF510FC83F270ABEC3E2A
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F0006031001
Current nonce: 0EEFA88D4FB45539A0B20C586D989BF510FC83F270ABEC3E2AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: 2AEEC1974BF5ED7DE100A555DD98E420E5CA0C33918F8BEFF3524B1FED047C52
Signature in message: 01EEC1974BF5ED7DE100A555DD98E420E5CA0C33918F8BEFF3
Message signed
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=8,pt=1,l=1,sg=0:0
Skipping security for command 3 type 8
TSP:MSG:FPAR RES (ID=0, dist=0)
TSP:MSG:PAR OK (ID=0, dist=1)
!TSP:SEND:TNR
!TSP:SEND:TNR
!TSP:SEND:TNR
!TSP:SEND:TNR
TSM:FPAR:OK
TSM:ID
TSM:CHKID:OK (ID=15)
TSM:UPL
TSP:PING:SEND (dest=0)
Skipping security for command 3 type 24
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=24,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,ft=0,st=fail:1
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=25,pt=1,l=1,sg=0:1
Skipping security for command 3 type 25
TSP:MSG:PONG RECV (hops=1)
TSP:CHKUPL:OK
TSM:UPL:OK
TSM:READY
Request registration...
Skipping security for command 3 type 26
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=26,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,ft=1,st=fail:2
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=0:
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
SHA256: 23DD90319EEA644480F44B15B3A95D6B20AD8380A953D40C7600000000000000
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=0,ft=2,st=fail:23DD90319EEA644480F44B15B3A95D6B20AD8380A953D40C76
Failed to transmit nonce!
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=27,pt=1,l=1,sg=1:1
Signature in message: 011EA3852B9E54EF00F415B0A6121E25B32B9C5F976A090B
Message to process: 000F0E231BFF01
Current nonce: 23DD90319EEA644480F44B15B3A95D6B20AD8380A953D40C76AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: 611EA3852B9E54EF00F415B0A6121E25B32B9C5F976A090BF2C96E0C02F28D72
Signature OK
Node registration=1
Init complete, id=15, parent=0, distance=1, registration=1
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=2,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1,ft=3,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=1:AA800D53018F5EAFCD48C21D3F702501539BFE5DF7E008B204
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F0006031002
Current nonce: AA800D53018F5EAFCD48C21D3F702501539BFE5DF7E008B204AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: 2E1247A4A77CA0767BFD16B9A1FCE401EF39B4D76FA6A96EF0978CE322271A6F
Signature in message: 011247A4A77CA0767BFD16B9A1FCE401EF39B4D76FA6A96EF0
Message signed
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=3,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1,ft=5,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=1:358C0D190097ABD8AB64BF680AF252EAC6036B73222A854502
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F0006031003
Current nonce: 358C0D190097ABD8AB64BF680AF252EAC6036B73222A854502AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: 4A209EA1B12FB01659122DD26F2F3FB7EC15439DDEFEA90813AA0E8F87321683
Signature in message: 01209EA1B12FB01659122DD26F2F3FB7EC15439DDEFEA90813
Message signed
Ping: 60 cm
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=1,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1,ft=7,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=1:0677F380706F11E12CFC0C43FE9559F36D8FDAEB6854836E06
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F0006031001
Current nonce: 0677F380706F11E12CFC0C43FE9559F36D8FDAEB6854836E06AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: 5E895658E4C08BCE1D6B5FC560D1AA608AB2AEDF9385EA80ABA1EDD8EE003EE5
Signature in message: 01895658E4C08BCE1D6B5FC560D1AA608AB2AEDF9385EA80AB
Message signed
Send button 1 pressed
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=4,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1,ft=9,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
!TSM:UPL FAIL, SNP
TSM:FPAR
TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-255-255 s=255,c=3,t=7,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,ft=0,st=bc:
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=1:EE3BFA6BFDD922BB892AC9A1BF2079803D8C3C258B18DFA29B
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F0006031004
Current nonce: EE3BFA6BFDD922BB892AC9A1BF2079803D8C3C258B18DFA29BAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: 7BEF3C478AD984729ED9A2717575A5325E66EF4C0CC9D3D761A1886A4BF4C4FD
Signature in message: 01EF3C478AD984729ED9A2717575A5325E66EF4C0CC9D3D761
Message signed
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=8,pt=1,l=1,sg=1:0
Skipping security for command 3 type 8
TSP:MSG:FPAR RES (ID=0, dist=0)
TSP:MSG:PAR OK (ID=0, dist=1)
!TSP:SEND:TNR
TSM:FPAR:OK
TSM:ID
TSM:CHKID:OK (ID=15)
TSM:UPL
TSP:PING:SEND (dest=0)
Skipping security for command 3 type 24
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=24,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,ft=0,st=fail:1
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=25,pt=1,l=1,sg=1:1
Skipping security for command 3 type 25
TSP:MSG:PONG RECV (hops=1)
TSP:CHKUPL:OK
TSM:UPL:OK
TSM:READY
Send button 1 pressed
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=4,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1,ft=1,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=1:9069C5ABD4E3E13F19A92D0B708ABB41C809B6D67654357C61
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F0006031004
Current nonce: 9069C5ABD4E3E13F19A92D0B708ABB41C809B6D67654357C61AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: 01CCD77E9CC961B65E896180243DAB5E9174C0B88032D38261ED78BB619A00EF
Signature in message: 01CCD77E9CC961B65E896180243DAB5E9174C0B88032D38261
Message signed
Skipping security for command 3 type 16
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=2,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1,ft=3,st=fail:
Failed to transmit nonce request!
!TSP:MSG:SIGN fail
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=1:1B94EC3D5354C0431C3D49CEC8903433984E2DE5D04F2D00DD
Skipping security for command 3 type 17
Nonce received from 0. Proceeding with signing...
Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
Message to process: 0F0006031002
Current nonce: 1B94EC3D5354C0431C3D49CEC8903433984E2DE5D04F2D00DDAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HMAC: D46DFC8ACCEE0FA7E6D282E8556F9EC7659804AD3D33163E9522F7769449F809
Signature in message: 016DFC8ACCEE0FA7E6D282E8556F9EC7659804AD3D33163E95
Message signed
Ping: 61 cm
Ping: 60 cm
Ping: 60 cm
TSP:MSG:READ 12-12-255 s=255,c=3,t=7,pt=0,l=0,sg=0:
TSP:MSG:BC
TSP:MSG:FPAR REQ (sender=12)
TSP:PING:SEND (dest=0)
Skipping security for command 3 type 24
!TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=24,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,ft=5,st=fail:1
TSP:MSG:READ 0-0-15 s=255,c=3,t=25,pt=1,l=1,sg=0:1
Skipping security for command 3 type 25
TSP:MSG:PONG RECV (hops=1)
TSP:CHKUPL:OK
TSP:MSG:GWL OK
TSP:MSG:SEND 15-15-12-12 s=255,c=3,t=8,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,ft=6,st=ok:1
Ping: 60 cm
                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • AnticimexA Offline
                          AnticimexA Offline
                          Anticimex
                          Contest Winner
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #26

                          Not sure if it is a typo or now but you list
                          #define MY_SIGNING_ASOFT but it should be #define MY_SIGNING_SOFT

                          In any case, you get st=fail which mean your radio setup is basically not working.
                          For any security to work, messages has to get through, and from your log, they don't:
                          "Failed to transmit signing presentation!"
                          "Failed to transmit nonce request!"
                          So I think from the log that signing and encryption is working, but occasionally you get messages dropped due to a poor radio link which manifests itself as failed transmissions.

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

                          FotoFieberF 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • lyndaeldoL Offline
                            lyndaeldoL Offline
                            lyndaeldo
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #27

                            If implemented correctly, AES is AES; the output between two different implementations is identical, and therefore no distinction is possible in after-the-fact comparison -- if done correctly, the one is exactly the same as the other.

                            But there are a few points where differences can crop in:

                            Operation Mode
                            Truecrypt implements a modified counter mode called XTS. It's pretty well vetted and has withstood some serious abuse from some powerful attackers (such as the US Government).

                            From examining the p7zip source code, it appears that AES encoding for the 7-zip format operates in CBC mode. This is certainly not necessarily insecure; it's the mode most popularly used in protocols such as TLS, but it is potentially vulnerable to padding oracle attacks. See this discussion on operation modes for more information.

                            Key Derivation
                            Truecrypt uses PBKDF2 to turn your password into an encryption key. It's difficult to come up with a better alternative than that. p7zip uses a salted SHA256 hash repeated over a configurable number of iterations. PBKDF2 is a bit more configurable, but 7-zip's alternative is functionally similar and arguably reaches the same goals.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • AnticimexA Anticimex

                              Not sure if it is a typo or now but you list
                              #define MY_SIGNING_ASOFT but it should be #define MY_SIGNING_SOFT

                              In any case, you get st=fail which mean your radio setup is basically not working.
                              For any security to work, messages has to get through, and from your log, they don't:
                              "Failed to transmit signing presentation!"
                              "Failed to transmit nonce request!"
                              So I think from the log that signing and encryption is working, but occasionally you get messages dropped due to a poor radio link which manifests itself as failed transmissions.

                              FotoFieberF Offline
                              FotoFieberF Offline
                              FotoFieber
                              Hardware Contributor
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #28

                              @Anticimex
                              Sorry for the typo.

                              Interestingly, the sketch is working perfect without signing.

                              I will try to add another power source and try again.

                              Do you have a working setup with encryption and signing?

                              AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • FotoFieberF FotoFieber

                                @Anticimex
                                Sorry for the typo.

                                Interestingly, the sketch is working perfect without signing.

                                I will try to add another power source and try again.

                                Do you have a working setup with encryption and signing?

                                AnticimexA Offline
                                AnticimexA Offline
                                Anticimex
                                Contest Winner
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #29

                                @FotoFieber When you use signing, the max message size is used, and this strains the rf link the most. Signing is still not your problem. It is clear from the log that messages fail to transmit, and that is a radio problem.

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

                                alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • AnticimexA Anticimex

                                  @FotoFieber When you use signing, the max message size is used, and this strains the rf link the most. Signing is still not your problem. It is clear from the log that messages fail to transmit, and that is a radio problem.

                                  alexsh1A Offline
                                  alexsh1A Offline
                                  alexsh1
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #30

                                  @Anticimex @FotoFieber

                                  We have been through this a few times. Just a suggestion - shall we do an FAQ link explaining what you have just said (st=fail is a problem of radio and not singing). Ingerestingly enough I did not manage to resolve this issue with the Sensebender. I still get several fail to transmit nonce before it starts working fine. Only the Sensebender. All other nodes work flawlessly

                                  AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • alexsh1A alexsh1

                                    @Anticimex @FotoFieber

                                    We have been through this a few times. Just a suggestion - shall we do an FAQ link explaining what you have just said (st=fail is a problem of radio and not singing). Ingerestingly enough I did not manage to resolve this issue with the Sensebender. I still get several fail to transmit nonce before it starts working fine. Only the Sensebender. All other nodes work flawlessly

                                    AnticimexA Offline
                                    AnticimexA Offline
                                    Anticimex
                                    Contest Winner
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #31

                                    @alexsh1 It is already documented where all signing is documented:
                                    https://ci.mysensors.org/job/Verifiers/job/MySensorsArduino/branch/master/Doxygen_HTML/group__MySigninggrp.html

                                    Check the troubleshooting section for details. Link to all documentation is on the github frontpage and on the "head" post of the signing topic on this forum.

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

                                    alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • AnticimexA Anticimex

                                      @alexsh1 It is already documented where all signing is documented:
                                      https://ci.mysensors.org/job/Verifiers/job/MySensorsArduino/branch/master/Doxygen_HTML/group__MySigninggrp.html

                                      Check the troubleshooting section for details. Link to all documentation is on the github frontpage and on the "head" post of the signing topic on this forum.

                                      alexsh1A Offline
                                      alexsh1A Offline
                                      alexsh1
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #32

                                      @Anticimex OK, that's super. I think we all became victims of nrf24l01+ terrible fake copies. Some of these work OK until....
                                      Then a woodoo dance has to be performed (highly recommended) in order to make them work again.

                                      AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • alexsh1A alexsh1

                                        @Anticimex OK, that's super. I think we all became victims of nrf24l01+ terrible fake copies. Some of these work OK until....
                                        Then a woodoo dance has to be performed (highly recommended) in order to make them work again.

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

                                        @alexsh1 Don't forget the goat sacrifice

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

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • FotoFieberF Offline
                                          FotoFieberF Offline
                                          FotoFieber
                                          Hardware Contributor
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #34

                                          I have tried a different setups now

                                          • Arduino Mega2560, Arduino Uno
                                          • different NRF modules from different vendors, with and withoud amplifier, with different capacitors
                                          • different power supplies

                                          I always end up getting st-fail, even with encryption only. But it is working even with these fails... :smile:

                                          @Anticimex
                                          You have a working setup with encrpytion and the actual libraries from github without st-fail?

                                          Next tests:

                                          • change NRF and power supply on the gateway
                                          • and if all that doesn't help: make a setup without encryption
                                          AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes

                                          15

                                          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