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. Remote password assign

Remote password assign

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Development
16 Posts 3 Posters 1.5k Views 3 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.
  • gohanG gohan

    Of course sending keys OTA is not advised, but still if you have someone sniffing your wireless mysensors data it must be really motivated to get into your house :D

    Actually I said 2 gateways but they would need to be on separate networks: one taking care of the FOTA on old nodes and the other configured to get the nodes reprogrammed.

    AnticimexA Offline
    AnticimexA Offline
    Anticimex
    Contest Winner
    wrote on last edited by
    #7

    @gohan I understood the part of 2 gateways, and as I said, assuming they are on separate networks, separate sketches will be needed so I don't understand what that would solve compared to my initial proposal.

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

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • gohanG Offline
      gohanG Offline
      gohan
      Mod
      wrote on last edited by
      #8

      Once fota process has been completed for all the nodes, you just kill the old gateway

      AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • gohanG gohan

        Once fota process has been completed for all the nodes, you just kill the old gateway

        AnticimexA Offline
        AnticimexA Offline
        Anticimex
        Contest Winner
        wrote on last edited by
        #9

        @gohan and how is that different from "once the nodes have the new key, change the key on the gateway"?

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

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • gohanG Offline
          gohanG Offline
          gohan
          Mod
          wrote on last edited by
          #10

          No big difference besides that you actually get a monitor if everything is going well.

          AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • gohanG gohan

            No big difference besides that you actually get a monitor if everything is going well.

            AnticimexA Offline
            AnticimexA Offline
            Anticimex
            Contest Winner
            wrote on last edited by
            #11

            @gohan maybe, at the cost of the hassle of having to mess a lot with the controller to handle two gateways which most likely will cause the nodes to get new id:s and loose any existing configurations.

            But this is an academic discussion, pulling the stunt of changing security keys OTA is not advised, and there will be no official support for a dedicated command to do this in 2.x.x versions due to the security implications.
            I have loosened security by supporting the "password" option too much for my comfort already :)

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

            1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • Kestutis MockusK Offline
              Kestutis MockusK Offline
              Kestutis Mockus
              wrote on last edited by
              #12

              Sorry for delay. I mean send password not in FOTA but as separate command. In that case gateway should communicate with signed and not signed password nodes. From insecure node only limited commands would be accepted by the gateway, so no hacks would be available like door opening and etc.
              The controller would initiate process of changing or assigning password.
              So if password gets leaked or node stolen, you would need only initiate password change command in controller without re flashing all nodes with new password.
              I know it maybe a security issue, but it would be a lot easier to use same node firmware version for multiple signed passwords.

              AnticimexA 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • Kestutis MockusK Kestutis Mockus

                Sorry for delay. I mean send password not in FOTA but as separate command. In that case gateway should communicate with signed and not signed password nodes. From insecure node only limited commands would be accepted by the gateway, so no hacks would be available like door opening and etc.
                The controller would initiate process of changing or assigning password.
                So if password gets leaked or node stolen, you would need only initiate password change command in controller without re flashing all nodes with new password.
                I know it maybe a security issue, but it would be a lot easier to use same node firmware version for multiple signed passwords.

                AnticimexA Offline
                AnticimexA Offline
                Anticimex
                Contest Winner
                wrote on last edited by
                #13

                @kestutis-mockus I don't understand. If you send the password using rf to a node, that password can be sniffed and used by nodes other than your own which would be able to make themself indistinguishable from your own nodes to your gateway/controller.

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

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • Kestutis MockusK Kestutis Mockus

                  Sorry for delay. I mean send password not in FOTA but as separate command. In that case gateway should communicate with signed and not signed password nodes. From insecure node only limited commands would be accepted by the gateway, so no hacks would be available like door opening and etc.
                  The controller would initiate process of changing or assigning password.
                  So if password gets leaked or node stolen, you would need only initiate password change command in controller without re flashing all nodes with new password.
                  I know it maybe a security issue, but it would be a lot easier to use same node firmware version for multiple signed passwords.

                  AnticimexA Offline
                  AnticimexA Offline
                  Anticimex
                  Contest Winner
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #14

                  @kestutis-mockus I should also clarify that by OTA I mean "Over the Air", as opposed to FOTA witch is "Firmware Over the Air".
                  Any OTA message can be sniffed by others. To prevent that, encryption can be used, but in this case the usecase is to change encryption password which is a bad idea since some nodes might get the message and change their key. Others might miss it and then won't be able to decrypt future communications as the gateway would have to start using the new password to communicate with the nodes that changed theirs.
                  All in all, the solution will just be complicated and prone to errors, something the password option was designed to be anything but.

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

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • Kestutis MockusK Offline
                    Kestutis MockusK Offline
                    Kestutis Mockus
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #15

                    Well to check if password is changed, verify message could be sent with new encryption, if no replay - send new password change command again. For password sending in OTA - new password could encrypted with predefined encryption key which would be safely saved in atcha and defined uniquely by each developer.
                    It is just my thoughts, as I understand it cannot be accomplished easily without modifining core files and private modificated files would be overwriten by updates.
                    Will waot for future updates if something similiar will be developed.
                    Thanks and sorry for english :)

                    AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • Kestutis MockusK Kestutis Mockus

                      Well to check if password is changed, verify message could be sent with new encryption, if no replay - send new password change command again. For password sending in OTA - new password could encrypted with predefined encryption key which would be safely saved in atcha and defined uniquely by each developer.
                      It is just my thoughts, as I understand it cannot be accomplished easily without modifining core files and private modificated files would be overwriten by updates.
                      Will waot for future updates if something similiar will be developed.
                      Thanks and sorry for english :)

                      AnticimexA Offline
                      AnticimexA Offline
                      Anticimex
                      Contest Winner
                      wrote on last edited by Anticimex
                      #16

                      @kestutis-mockus I still think it is too complicated for what the basic feature actually provide (which is weak security) and it relies on a atsha which on its own implement stronger security based on personalization, something the entire password feature was designed to circumvent. But if you feel the feature is strongly desired, feel free to file a pr (and maintain) the feature and if it is well designed it can be incorporated in the core.
                      But personally I don't feel it gives enough benefit for being worth the effort of implementation and maintenance.
                      I'd rather focus on development of the next generation security which is designed to replace the current encryption/signing solution in its entirety (the current solution will remain an option for those who prefer it though). But this will be first in mysensors v3.

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

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      22

                      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