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 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 Online
                              hekH Online
                              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
                                      • NiklasON NiklasO

                                        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 Offline
                                        AnticimexA Offline
                                        Anticimex
                                        Contest Winner
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #278

                                        @NiklasO @marceloaqno is working on this.

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

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        1
                                        • E Offline
                                          E Offline
                                          executivul
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #279

                                          Hi,
                                          I have about 100 ATSHA204 I2C variant to be used in a MySensors project.
                                          Do you think that by modifying the personalizer sketch to disable the I2C bit in the configuration (0x03 word address) the chips can be set to be used as single-wire, or are they hardcoded to use only one protocol, but then why having the config bit?

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


                                          16

                                          Online

                                          11.7k

                                          Users

                                          11.2k

                                          Topics

                                          113.0k

                                          Posts


                                          Copyright 2019 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