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. [security] Introducing signing support to MySensors

[security] Introducing signing support to MySensors

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Development
security
491 Posts 48 Posters 334.0k Views 30 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.
  • alexsh1A alexsh1

    @Anticimex Ok, but is there a reason why one would have HMAC key in both ATSHA204a and EEPROM?

    AnticimexA Offline
    AnticimexA Offline
    Anticimex
    Contest Winner
    wrote on last edited by
    #258

    @alexsh1 no, not really. If you have a atsha204a the only reason to not use it would be performance. Software signing executes slightly faster due to the single write protocol of the atsha.

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

    alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • AnticimexA Anticimex

      @alexsh1 no, not really. If you have a atsha204a the only reason to not use it would be performance. Software signing executes slightly faster due to the single write protocol of the atsha.

      alexsh1A Offline
      alexsh1A Offline
      alexsh1
      wrote on last edited by
      #259

      @Anticimex Thanks very much for your help - I must admit it was a bit of a challenge to jump straight away from a stable 1.5.4 to 2.0 beta

      AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • alexsh1A alexsh1

        @Anticimex Thanks very much for your help - I must admit it was a bit of a challenge to jump straight away from a stable 1.5.4 to 2.0 beta

        AnticimexA Offline
        AnticimexA Offline
        Anticimex
        Contest Winner
        wrote on last edited by
        #260

        @alexsh1 yes there have been a lot of changes but hopefully they are perceived as improvements. Feedback on signing usability is always welcome :)

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

        alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • AnticimexA Anticimex

          @alexsh1 yes there have been a lot of changes but hopefully they are perceived as improvements. Feedback on signing usability is always welcome :)

          alexsh1A Offline
          alexsh1A Offline
          alexsh1
          wrote on last edited by
          #261

          @Anticimex BTW, is signing compatible between 1.5.4 and 2.0b?

          AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • alexsh1A alexsh1

            @Anticimex BTW, is signing compatible between 1.5.4 and 2.0b?

            AnticimexA Offline
            AnticimexA Offline
            Anticimex
            Contest Winner
            wrote on last edited by
            #262

            @alexsh1 no, it is not

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

            alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • AnticimexA Anticimex

              @alexsh1 no, it is not

              alexsh1A Offline
              alexsh1A Offline
              alexsh1
              wrote on last edited by alexsh1
              #263

              @Anticimex Right, this is why I am not able to sign 1.5.4 nodes with 2.0b GW.
              In fact when I inserted #define MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES into the GW code, some nodes stopped working and I think it has to be with signing as GW is throwing a lot of messages that signing failed.

              Bottom line is that I need to upgrade pretty much all sensors :-(

              AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • alexsh1A alexsh1

                @Anticimex Right, this is why I am not able to sign 1.5.4 nodes with 2.0b GW.
                In fact when I inserted #define MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES into the GW code, some nodes stopped working and I think it has to be with signing as GW is throwing a lot of messages that signing failed.

                Bottom line is that I need to upgrade pretty much all sensors :-(

                AnticimexA Offline
                AnticimexA Offline
                Anticimex
                Contest Winner
                wrote on last edited by
                #264

                @alexsh1 yes, Unfortunately. But it is a huge release upcoming. And a major version step, hence the incompatibilities. Hopefully, the changes made will make it easier to do future maintenance.

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

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • C Offline
                  C Offline
                  cingolanifede
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #265

                  Hi. Is there any difference in using RFM69? Signing is supported using that radio? Thanks

                  AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • C cingolanifede

                    Hi. Is there any difference in using RFM69? Signing is supported using that radio? Thanks

                    AnticimexA Offline
                    AnticimexA Offline
                    Anticimex
                    Contest Winner
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #266

                    @cingolanifede signing has nothing to to with which radio you choose so yes. It supports any transport, but to my knowledge it has only been actually tested with nrf24 and rfm69.

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

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • alexsh1A Offline
                      alexsh1A Offline
                      alexsh1
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #267

                      @Anticimex I must admit that signing is working really-really nicely on my custom made nodes (Soft sign and ATSHA204A)

                      Apart from a small issue with the sensebender, which I believe is not a signing issue, it is working like a charm. All credit to you! Thank you

                      Starting sensor (RNNNAS, 2.0.0-beta)
                      Radio init successful.
                      HTU21D Sensor1.1 - Online!
                      isMetric: 1
                      TempDiff :1098.00
                      HumDiff  :136.75
                      T: 998.00
                      H: 36.75
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=0,c=1,t=0,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:998.0
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=1,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:36.7
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=2,c=1,t=38,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:3.29
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=0,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,st=ok:106
                      Signing required
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=15,pt=0,l=2,sg=0,st=ok:
                      Waiting for GW to send signing preferences...
                      Skipping security for command 3 type 15
                      read: 0-0-5 s=255,c=3,t=15,pt=0,l=2,sg=0:
                      Mark node 0 as one that do not require signed messages
                      Mark node 0 as one that do not require whitelisting
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=0,t=17,pt=0,l=10,sg=0,st=ok:2.0.0-beta
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=6,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,st=ok:0
                      Skipping security for command 3 type 16
                      read: 0-0-5 s=255,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=0:
                      Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
                      SHA256: 2C4A871ACCAE26760F41E547DD39B7B816FE22EEBCD8DFA2FE00000000000000
                      Transmittng nonce
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=0,st=ok:2C4A871ACCAE26760F41E547DD39B7B816FE22EEBCD8DFA2FE
                      Signature in message: 01C31110DAE29D5DCD3771F68B6F29B5CCCF43A3D5397CC8
                      Message to process: 00050E0306FF4D
                      Current nonce: 2C4A871ACCAE26760F41E547DD39B7B816FE22EEBCD8DFA2FEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
                      HMAC: 0CC31110DAE29D5DCD3771F68B6F29B5CCCF43A3D5397CC89A82A89D87E931B8
                      Signature OK
                      read: 0-0-5 s=255,c=3,t=6,pt=0,l=1,sg=0:M
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=11,pt=0,l=24,sg=0,st=ok:Temp/Hum Sensor - HTU21D
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=12,pt=0,l=3,sg=0,st=ok:1.1
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=0,c=0,t=6,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,st=ok:
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=1,c=0,t=7,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,st=ok:
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=2,c=0,t=13,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,st=ok:
                      Init complete, id=5, parent=0, distance=1
                      TempDiff :971.94
                      HumDiff  :0.02
                      T: 26.06
                      H: 36.72
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=0,c=1,t=0,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:26.1
                      send: 5-5-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=1,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:36.7
                      
                      AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      • alexsh1A alexsh1

                        @Anticimex I must admit that signing is working really-really nicely on my custom made nodes (Soft sign and ATSHA204A)

                        Apart from a small issue with the sensebender, which I believe is not a signing issue, it is working like a charm. All credit to you! Thank you

                        Starting sensor (RNNNAS, 2.0.0-beta)
                        Radio init successful.
                        HTU21D Sensor1.1 - Online!
                        isMetric: 1
                        TempDiff :1098.00
                        HumDiff  :136.75
                        T: 998.00
                        H: 36.75
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=0,c=1,t=0,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:998.0
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=1,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:36.7
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=2,c=1,t=38,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:3.29
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=0,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,st=ok:106
                        Signing required
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=15,pt=0,l=2,sg=0,st=ok:
                        Waiting for GW to send signing preferences...
                        Skipping security for command 3 type 15
                        read: 0-0-5 s=255,c=3,t=15,pt=0,l=2,sg=0:
                        Mark node 0 as one that do not require signed messages
                        Mark node 0 as one that do not require whitelisting
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=0,t=17,pt=0,l=10,sg=0,st=ok:2.0.0-beta
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=6,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,st=ok:0
                        Skipping security for command 3 type 16
                        read: 0-0-5 s=255,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=0:
                        Signing backend: ATSHA204Soft
                        SHA256: 2C4A871ACCAE26760F41E547DD39B7B816FE22EEBCD8DFA2FE00000000000000
                        Transmittng nonce
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=0,st=ok:2C4A871ACCAE26760F41E547DD39B7B816FE22EEBCD8DFA2FE
                        Signature in message: 01C31110DAE29D5DCD3771F68B6F29B5CCCF43A3D5397CC8
                        Message to process: 00050E0306FF4D
                        Current nonce: 2C4A871ACCAE26760F41E547DD39B7B816FE22EEBCD8DFA2FEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
                        HMAC: 0CC31110DAE29D5DCD3771F68B6F29B5CCCF43A3D5397CC89A82A89D87E931B8
                        Signature OK
                        read: 0-0-5 s=255,c=3,t=6,pt=0,l=1,sg=0:M
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=11,pt=0,l=24,sg=0,st=ok:Temp/Hum Sensor - HTU21D
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=12,pt=0,l=3,sg=0,st=ok:1.1
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=0,c=0,t=6,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,st=ok:
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=1,c=0,t=7,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,st=ok:
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=2,c=0,t=13,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,st=ok:
                        Init complete, id=5, parent=0, distance=1
                        TempDiff :971.94
                        HumDiff  :0.02
                        T: 26.06
                        H: 36.72
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=0,c=1,t=0,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:26.1
                        send: 5-5-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=1,pt=7,l=5,sg=0,st=ok:36.7
                        
                        AnticimexA Offline
                        AnticimexA Offline
                        Anticimex
                        Contest Winner
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #268

                        @alexsh1 I'm really glad to hear that. Thank you! Glad that signing is being used and is perceived as something not to complicated to bother with. It sets us apart from many other projects dealing with the same thing :)

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

                        alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • AnticimexA Anticimex

                          @alexsh1 I'm really glad to hear that. Thank you! Glad that signing is being used and is perceived as something not to complicated to bother with. It sets us apart from many other projects dealing with the same thing :)

                          alexsh1A Offline
                          alexsh1A Offline
                          alexsh1
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #269

                          @Anticimex I did not say it was not complicated :)
                          Just kidding - speaking just for myself, it did require some time investment to understand the concept and then upgrading my gateway and my nodes (I am still in the process of rolling signing across the rest of my nodes) to MySensors 2.0b. I probably spent more time upgrading MySensors lib and breaking some hardware in the meantime (the SMA connector on the nrf24l01+ PA+LNA) than the actual signing.

                          AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • alexsh1A alexsh1

                            @Anticimex I did not say it was not complicated :)
                            Just kidding - speaking just for myself, it did require some time investment to understand the concept and then upgrading my gateway and my nodes (I am still in the process of rolling signing across the rest of my nodes) to MySensors 2.0b. I probably spent more time upgrading MySensors lib and breaking some hardware in the meantime (the SMA connector on the nrf24l01+ PA+LNA) than the actual signing.

                            AnticimexA Offline
                            AnticimexA Offline
                            Anticimex
                            Contest Winner
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #270

                            @alexsh1 yeah, well if there is room for improvement in the documentation then feel free to help put with suggestions if there is anything unclear about that :) I use doxygen to document signing features, and a link is available on the GitHub "front-page" (the readme.md)

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

                            alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • AnticimexA Anticimex

                              @alexsh1 yeah, well if there is room for improvement in the documentation then feel free to help put with suggestions if there is anything unclear about that :) I use doxygen to document signing features, and a link is available on the GitHub "front-page" (the readme.md)

                              alexsh1A Offline
                              alexsh1A Offline
                              alexsh1
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #271

                              @Anticimex I think a noob's section would be good. Having said that, the point is that signing is not something beginners should touch. What do you think?

                              How about a section on the web-site? Somewhere here - https://www.mysensors.org/build/

                              AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • alexsh1A alexsh1

                                @Anticimex I think a noob's section would be good. Having said that, the point is that signing is not something beginners should touch. What do you think?

                                How about a section on the web-site? Somewhere here - https://www.mysensors.org/build/

                                AnticimexA Offline
                                AnticimexA Offline
                                Anticimex
                                Contest Winner
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #272

                                @alexsh1 hm, yeah, perhaps something for @hek to consider. At least a link to the signing section of the doxygen docs could be placed there. I have tried to make the documentation as step-by-step friendly as I can. That said, as I also did the actual implementation, I may well be blind for certain aspects I take for granted that a "novice" does not.

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

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • hekH Offline
                                  hekH Offline
                                  hek
                                  Admin
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #273

                                  The next release of the main site will be much more flexible and integrated with openhardware-added projects. The idea is to allow community members to maintain their projects and/or "articles" themselves. The how-to for signing is a good example of an article.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • F Offline
                                    F Offline
                                    Fabien
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #274

                                    This tutorial is up to date for 2.0 release ?

                                    AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • F Fabien

                                      This tutorial is up to date for 2.0 release ?

                                      AnticimexA Offline
                                      AnticimexA Offline
                                      Anticimex
                                      Contest Winner
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #275

                                      @Fabien Yes, top post is now updated for 2.0.0. Documentation is in doxygen.

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

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      1
                                      • F Offline
                                        F Offline
                                        Fabien
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #276

                                        Thank you @Anticimex I will update my network soon and had RFM69 Encryption too.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • NiklasON Offline
                                          NiklasON Offline
                                          NiklasO
                                          wrote on last edited by NiklasO
                                          #277

                                          Trying this:
                                          https://www.mysensors.org/build/raspberry

                                          How do I enable signing and give the gateway the serial, hmac and aes-key when running on Linux? (rPi).

                                          Edit: Pin 7 as random number generator maybe need some change?

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


                                          21

                                          Online

                                          11.7k

                                          Users

                                          11.2k

                                          Topics

                                          113.0k

                                          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