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 333.9k 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

    Do you think that I may have verification timeout due to having a mixture 2.1.1 and 2.2.0?

    0;255;3;0;9;124541 Signing backend: ATSHA204
    0;255;3;0;9;124594 SHA256: 9CEF656D53F4C3722D72AE17346E310BD300161FAB992261DD5216C08D0D7950
    0;255;3;0;9;124605 Will not sign message for destination 16 as it does not require it
    0;255;3;0;9;124618 TSF:MSG:SEND,0-0-16-16,s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:9CEF656D53F4C3722D72AE17346E310BD300161FAB992261DD
    0;255;3;0;9;124628 Transmitted nonce
    0;255;3;0;9;124799 TSF:MSG:READ,16-16-0,s=255,c=3,t=0,pt=1,l=1,sg=1:76
    16;255;3;0;0;76
    0;255;3;0;9;124809 TSF:MSG:READ,16-16-0,s=0,c=3,t=16,pt=0,l=0,sg=1:
    0;255;3;0;9;124819 Signing backend: ATSHA204
    0;255;3;0;9;124872 SHA256: 326EB7828E5F02AB2F9FCE645FC5B7D2628DDD70FED64C78275AC1FA0D1C1AF5
    0;255;3;0;9;124883 Will not sign message for destination 16 as it does not require it
    0;255;3;0;9;124896 TSF:MSG:SEND,0-0-16-16,s=255,c=3,t=17,pt=6,l=25,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:326EB7828E5F02AB2F9FCE645FC5B7D2628DDD70FED64C7827
    0;255;3;0;9;124906 Transmitted nonce
    0;255;3;0;9;125176 TSF:MSG:READ,16-16-0,s=0,c=1,t=38,pt=7,l=5,sg=1:2.9
    16;0;1;0;38;2.9
    0;255;3;0;9;137796 Verification timeout
    
    AnticimexA Offline
    AnticimexA Offline
    Anticimex
    Contest Winner
    wrote on last edited by
    #396

    @alexsh1 Hm, it should not be a problem. Assuming your log snippet is from the GW, it basically says that it successfully transmit the nonce to your node as requested to, and then it expects the node to provide a signed message to the GW within a certain timeout. The node fails to do this within that time so the GW times out and will not accept the message if it arrives later on.
    So there are two options;

    1. The node takes too long to process the received nonce, sign the message and send it back (perhaps many repeater hops between node and gw, this can be resolved by increasing the signing timeout at the GW side).
    2. The node does transmit the signed message but fails with a NACK. The GW will never see this message and therefore assumes the node did not send it and correctly times out.

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

    alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • AnticimexA Anticimex

      @alexsh1 Hm, it should not be a problem. Assuming your log snippet is from the GW, it basically says that it successfully transmit the nonce to your node as requested to, and then it expects the node to provide a signed message to the GW within a certain timeout. The node fails to do this within that time so the GW times out and will not accept the message if it arrives later on.
      So there are two options;

      1. The node takes too long to process the received nonce, sign the message and send it back (perhaps many repeater hops between node and gw, this can be resolved by increasing the signing timeout at the GW side).
      2. The node does transmit the signed message but fails with a NACK. The GW will never see this message and therefore assumes the node did not send it and correctly times out.
      alexsh1A Offline
      alexsh1A Offline
      alexsh1
      wrote on last edited by alexsh1
      #397

      @Anticimex On the node, changing nrf24l01+ orientation (I have two nrf24l01+ sockets) 90 degrees changed signing from

      0;255;3;0;9;120620 Transmitted nonce
      0;255;3;0;9;120630 TSF:MSG:READ,4-4-0,s=1,c=1,t=0,pt=7,l=5,sg=1:24.0
      0;255;3;0;9;120644 Current nonce: 415DAB5FF6170E67F5B180ADC827C062D35CBF2DCE1B6B0264AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
      0;255;3;0;9;120745 HMAC: 759A77B66BAC8F0AEA542685F4EA12DEB66B27FE15F57788F1D1022508984896
      0;255;3;0;9;120756 Signature bad
      0;255;3;0;9;120766 Signature verification failed!
      0;255;3;0;9;120776 !TSF:MSG:SIGN VERIFY FAIL
      0;255;3;0;9;120981 TSF:MSG:READ,4-4-0,s=2,c=1,t=1,pt=2,l=2,sg=1:70
      0;255;3;0;9;120991 No active verification session
      0;255;3;0;9;121001 Signature verification failed!
      0;255;3;0;9;121011 !TSF:MSG:SIGN VERIFY FAIL
      
      0;255;3;0;9;165728 Transmitted nonce
      0;255;3;0;9;165944 TSF:MSG:READ,4-4-0,s=1,c=1,t=0,pt=7,l=5,sg=1:24.4
      0;255;3;0;9;165958 Current nonce: BAC8828FEAAFB3A0C65DE6F8D4993E4D3D93F190B58AA3C737AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
      0;255;3;0;9;166059 HMAC: 122222A7C324B3688BD98EC8EF9AD9557350B874CAB38F250A246EBB069805D3
      0;255;3;0;9;166070 Signature OK
      
      AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • alexsh1A alexsh1

        @Anticimex On the node, changing nrf24l01+ orientation (I have two nrf24l01+ sockets) 90 degrees changed signing from

        0;255;3;0;9;120620 Transmitted nonce
        0;255;3;0;9;120630 TSF:MSG:READ,4-4-0,s=1,c=1,t=0,pt=7,l=5,sg=1:24.0
        0;255;3;0;9;120644 Current nonce: 415DAB5FF6170E67F5B180ADC827C062D35CBF2DCE1B6B0264AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
        0;255;3;0;9;120745 HMAC: 759A77B66BAC8F0AEA542685F4EA12DEB66B27FE15F57788F1D1022508984896
        0;255;3;0;9;120756 Signature bad
        0;255;3;0;9;120766 Signature verification failed!
        0;255;3;0;9;120776 !TSF:MSG:SIGN VERIFY FAIL
        0;255;3;0;9;120981 TSF:MSG:READ,4-4-0,s=2,c=1,t=1,pt=2,l=2,sg=1:70
        0;255;3;0;9;120991 No active verification session
        0;255;3;0;9;121001 Signature verification failed!
        0;255;3;0;9;121011 !TSF:MSG:SIGN VERIFY FAIL
        
        0;255;3;0;9;165728 Transmitted nonce
        0;255;3;0;9;165944 TSF:MSG:READ,4-4-0,s=1,c=1,t=0,pt=7,l=5,sg=1:24.4
        0;255;3;0;9;165958 Current nonce: BAC8828FEAAFB3A0C65DE6F8D4993E4D3D93F190B58AA3C737AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
        0;255;3;0;9;166059 HMAC: 122222A7C324B3688BD98EC8EF9AD9557350B874CAB38F250A246EBB069805D3
        0;255;3;0;9;166070 Signature OK
        
        AnticimexA Offline
        AnticimexA Offline
        Anticimex
        Contest Winner
        wrote on last edited by
        #398

        @alexsh1 Looks like RF performance was significantly improved by that change.

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

        alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • AnticimexA Anticimex

          @alexsh1 Looks like RF performance was significantly improved by that change.

          alexsh1A Offline
          alexsh1A Offline
          alexsh1
          wrote on last edited by alexsh1
          #399

          @Anticimex It seems to me that 90% of all issues is actually RF.
          Very annoying!

          Thanks for your help!

          1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • alexsh1A Offline
            alexsh1A Offline
            alexsh1
            wrote on last edited by
            #400

            I am using latest beta (2.2.0b). Does anyone know what this means in the log:

            !SGN:NCE:GEN
            

            I think this is related to signing

            AnticimexA 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • alexsh1A alexsh1

              I am using latest beta (2.2.0b). Does anyone know what this means in the log:

              !SGN:NCE:GEN
              

              I think this is related to signing

              AnticimexA Offline
              AnticimexA Offline
              Anticimex
              Contest Winner
              wrote on last edited by
              #401

              @alexsh1 https://ci.mysensors.org/job/Verifiers/job/MySensors/job/development/Doxygen_HTML/group__MySigningDebugMessages.html

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

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • alexsh1A alexsh1

                I am using latest beta (2.2.0b). Does anyone know what this means in the log:

                !SGN:NCE:GEN
                

                I think this is related to signing

                AnticimexA Offline
                AnticimexA Offline
                Anticimex
                Contest Winner
                wrote on last edited by
                #402

                @alexsh1 to be more specific; the backend failed to generate a nonce. If you use the soft backed, it did not initialize properly (and you should have a log entry for that failure as well).
                If using atsha204a, it either failed init like described above, or it failed to communicate properly (which should also be visible in other failures in the log)

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

                alexsh1A 1 Reply Last reply
                1
                • AnticimexA Anticimex

                  @alexsh1 to be more specific; the backend failed to generate a nonce. If you use the soft backed, it did not initialize properly (and you should have a log entry for that failure as well).
                  If using atsha204a, it either failed init like described above, or it failed to communicate properly (which should also be visible in other failures in the log)

                  alexsh1A Offline
                  alexsh1A Offline
                  alexsh1
                  wrote on last edited by alexsh1
                  #403

                  @Anticimex Spot on -> there was a mistake :

                  #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 3
                  

                  and should have been

                  #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 17
                  

                  I was wondering why nonce was all zeros...

                  AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • alexsh1A alexsh1

                    @Anticimex Spot on -> there was a mistake :

                    #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 3
                    

                    and should have been

                    #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 17
                    

                    I was wondering why nonce was all zeros...

                    AnticimexA Offline
                    AnticimexA Offline
                    Anticimex
                    Contest Winner
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #404

                    @alexsh1 excellent. Signing won't work well without proper communication with the chip :)
                    I considered just hanging if that happened but decided it was a bit too harsh and might disguise the problem in case UART debug isn't enabled.

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

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • magpernM Offline
                      magpernM Offline
                      magpern
                      wrote on last edited by magpern
                      #405

                      I cannot get my china USB to Serial device to work with the arduino boards, so I cannot program the board to run the personalization. As a work around a use a Arduino Uno board as the "USB to Serial" and now I can upload the sketch and the personalizer writes to serial output fine at 115200 baud.
                      But, when it wants me to press SPACE, it responds with "Unexpected answer. Skipping lock."

                      I tried an other sketch that does Serial.read() and echos back the result. It does not work at 115200 but works at 9600 baud. At 9600 I get char 32 back as SPACE, but 160 or 130 or 254 at 115200. Maybe the Uno board cannot handle 115200?

                      So, question: Can the personalizer sketch be changed to use 9600 (or something slower than 115200)? I tried to change the Serial.begin(115200) to 9600, but it is still 115200.

                      (of course, I can alter the code to bypass the press SPACE to press any key, but I want to get to the bottom with the problem)

                      AnticimexA mfalkviddM 3 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • magpernM magpern

                        I cannot get my china USB to Serial device to work with the arduino boards, so I cannot program the board to run the personalization. As a work around a use a Arduino Uno board as the "USB to Serial" and now I can upload the sketch and the personalizer writes to serial output fine at 115200 baud.
                        But, when it wants me to press SPACE, it responds with "Unexpected answer. Skipping lock."

                        I tried an other sketch that does Serial.read() and echos back the result. It does not work at 115200 but works at 9600 baud. At 9600 I get char 32 back as SPACE, but 160 or 130 or 254 at 115200. Maybe the Uno board cannot handle 115200?

                        So, question: Can the personalizer sketch be changed to use 9600 (or something slower than 115200)? I tried to change the Serial.begin(115200) to 9600, but it is still 115200.

                        (of course, I can alter the code to bypass the press SPACE to press any key, but I want to get to the bottom with the problem)

                        AnticimexA Offline
                        AnticimexA Offline
                        Anticimex
                        Contest Winner
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #406

                        @Magnus-Pernemark
                        Question 1: so you run stable release or beta?
                        Answer 1: yes you can change baud rate but it is handled differently between stable and beta.

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

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • magpernM magpern

                          I cannot get my china USB to Serial device to work with the arduino boards, so I cannot program the board to run the personalization. As a work around a use a Arduino Uno board as the "USB to Serial" and now I can upload the sketch and the personalizer writes to serial output fine at 115200 baud.
                          But, when it wants me to press SPACE, it responds with "Unexpected answer. Skipping lock."

                          I tried an other sketch that does Serial.read() and echos back the result. It does not work at 115200 but works at 9600 baud. At 9600 I get char 32 back as SPACE, but 160 or 130 or 254 at 115200. Maybe the Uno board cannot handle 115200?

                          So, question: Can the personalizer sketch be changed to use 9600 (or something slower than 115200)? I tried to change the Serial.begin(115200) to 9600, but it is still 115200.

                          (of course, I can alter the code to bypass the press SPACE to press any key, but I want to get to the bottom with the problem)

                          AnticimexA Offline
                          AnticimexA Offline
                          Anticimex
                          Contest Winner
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #407

                          @Magnus-Pernemark there is a configuration switch to disable UART verification you can use

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

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • magpernM magpern

                            I cannot get my china USB to Serial device to work with the arduino boards, so I cannot program the board to run the personalization. As a work around a use a Arduino Uno board as the "USB to Serial" and now I can upload the sketch and the personalizer writes to serial output fine at 115200 baud.
                            But, when it wants me to press SPACE, it responds with "Unexpected answer. Skipping lock."

                            I tried an other sketch that does Serial.read() and echos back the result. It does not work at 115200 but works at 9600 baud. At 9600 I get char 32 back as SPACE, but 160 or 130 or 254 at 115200. Maybe the Uno board cannot handle 115200?

                            So, question: Can the personalizer sketch be changed to use 9600 (or something slower than 115200)? I tried to change the Serial.begin(115200) to 9600, but it is still 115200.

                            (of course, I can alter the code to bypass the press SPACE to press any key, but I want to get to the bottom with the problem)

                            mfalkviddM Offline
                            mfalkviddM Offline
                            mfalkvidd
                            Mod
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #408

                            @Magnus-Pernemark which version are you using?
                            The development version from github supports

                            #define MY_BAUD_RATE 9600
                            

                            at the start of the sketch.

                            The 2.1.1 version has

                            Serial.begin(115200);
                            

                            in the sketch. Just change that.

                            magpernM 1 Reply Last reply
                            1
                            • mfalkviddM mfalkvidd

                              @Magnus-Pernemark which version are you using?
                              The development version from github supports

                              #define MY_BAUD_RATE 9600
                              

                              at the start of the sketch.

                              The 2.1.1 version has

                              Serial.begin(115200);
                              

                              in the sketch. Just change that.

                              magpernM Offline
                              magpernM Offline
                              magpern
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #409

                              @Anticimex I am so not familiar with the arduino/mysensors development yet, but I guess I use 2.1.1, since i used "Sketch / Include Library / Manage Library" and it had 2.1.1

                              @mfalkvidd Since I have the line Serial.begin(115200) I assume it is 2.1.1, but changing it to 9600 and uploading the sketch does nothing. I still need to open serial window with 115200, else I just see garbage as output from the mini pro.

                              I will try the development version and see if that helps.

                              AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • magpernM magpern

                                @Anticimex I am so not familiar with the arduino/mysensors development yet, but I guess I use 2.1.1, since i used "Sketch / Include Library / Manage Library" and it had 2.1.1

                                @mfalkvidd Since I have the line Serial.begin(115200) I assume it is 2.1.1, but changing it to 9600 and uploading the sketch does nothing. I still need to open serial window with 115200, else I just see garbage as output from the mini pro.

                                I will try the development version and see if that helps.

                                AnticimexA Offline
                                AnticimexA Offline
                                Anticimex
                                Contest Winner
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #410

                                @Magnus-Pernemark or you can just disable the confirmation altogether. Just define SKIP_UART_CONFIRMATION

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

                                magpernM 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • AnticimexA Anticimex

                                  @Magnus-Pernemark or you can just disable the confirmation altogether. Just define SKIP_UART_CONFIRMATION

                                  magpernM Offline
                                  magpernM Offline
                                  magpern
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #411

                                  @Anticimex hehe, true... but I am a developer by trade, and bypassing something just because it would be easier, feels so wrong. I might end up doing so, but I'll give it some more tries first. Problems are a very good way to learn, and in arduino development I am a total noobie, more used to C# and the .NET world.

                                  AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • magpernM magpern

                                    @Anticimex hehe, true... but I am a developer by trade, and bypassing something just because it would be easier, feels so wrong. I might end up doing so, but I'll give it some more tries first. Problems are a very good way to learn, and in arduino development I am a total noobie, more used to C# and the .NET world.

                                    AnticimexA Offline
                                    AnticimexA Offline
                                    Anticimex
                                    Contest Winner
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #412

                                    @Magnus-Pernemark as a developer by trade, you should be bold enough to use the beta releases and live on the bleeding edge then ;)

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

                                    magpernM 1 Reply Last reply
                                    1
                                    • AnticimexA Anticimex

                                      @Magnus-Pernemark as a developer by trade, you should be bold enough to use the beta releases and live on the bleeding edge then ;)

                                      magpernM Offline
                                      magpernM Offline
                                      magpern
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #413

                                      @Anticimex I'll start living on the edge immediately. It's the way to go!
                                      I switched to develop and could change the band rate, however develop version skips UART confirmation by default so I never had the problem there. Never needed to send any keys. Got the chip configured atleast.
                                      I kind of started in the wrong end - designed my own pcbs, then start to know the development environment.
                                      But I'll figure it out... just takes time.. thanks for the help!!

                                      AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • magpernM magpern

                                        @Anticimex I'll start living on the edge immediately. It's the way to go!
                                        I switched to develop and could change the band rate, however develop version skips UART confirmation by default so I never had the problem there. Never needed to send any keys. Got the chip configured atleast.
                                        I kind of started in the wrong end - designed my own pcbs, then start to know the development environment.
                                        But I'll figure it out... just takes time.. thanks for the help!!

                                        AnticimexA Offline
                                        AnticimexA Offline
                                        Anticimex
                                        Contest Winner
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #414

                                        @Magnus-Pernemark that's correct. Or, it is correct if you follow the "guided mode". If you wanna be hardcore, you drop the guided defines and set the individual flags according to your specific needs, and then you get to enable (or more precisely, not disable) UART confirmation (in case you want to test it).

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

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • gusG Offline
                                          gusG Offline
                                          gus
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #415

                                          Hi!
                                          Starting to learn signing. I use a parallell system (with another channel) where I could test signing before I went on my live system. For now I just use soft signing, it works perfect!

                                          Now, I just want to test a node (motionsensor) that include:

                                          #define MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES
                                          

                                          The gateway has no signing feature (it has not gone thru personalition process) In my head, the node shall reject to connect to this gateway, but after the signing fails, it start to send data to the gateway. Did I miss something here?

                                          Debug text on node:

                                          0 MCO:BGN:INIT NODE,CP=RNNNAS--,VER=2.2.0-beta
                                          49 SGN:PER:OK
                                          83 SGN:INI:BND OK
                                          83 TSM:INIT
                                          86 TSF:WUR:MS=0
                                          94 TSM:INIT:TSP OK
                                          96 TSM:INIT:STATID=101
                                          98 TSF:SID:OK,ID=101
                                          100 TSM:FPAR
                                          102 SGN:SGN:NREQ=255
                                          139 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-255-255,s=255,c=3,t=7,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:
                                          684 TSF:MSG:READ,0-0-101,s=255,c=3,t=8,pt=1,l=1,sg=0:0
                                          690 SGN:SKP:MSG CMD=3,TYPE=8
                                          692 TSF:MSG:FPAR OK,ID=0,D=1
                                          2148 TSM:FPAR:OK
                                          2148 TSM:ID
                                          2150 TSM:ID:OK
                                          2152 TSM:UPL
                                          2154 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2158 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=255,c=3,t=24,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:1
                                          2168 TSF:MSG:READ,0-0-101,s=255,c=3,t=25,pt=1,l=1,sg=0:1
                                          2174 SGN:SKP:MSG CMD=3,TYPE=25
                                          2177 TSF:MSG:PONG RECV,HP=1
                                          2181 TSM:UPL:OK
                                          2183 TSM:READY:ID=101,PAR=0,DIS=1
                                          2187 SGN:PRE:SGN REQ
                                          2189 SGN:PRE:WHI NREQ
                                          2191 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2195 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=255,c=3,t=15,pt=6,l=2,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:0101
                                          2203 SGN:PRE:XMT,TO=0
                                          2205 SGN:PRE:WAIT GW
                                          2207 TSF:MSG:READ,0-0-101,s=255,c=3,t=15,pt=6,l=2,sg=0:0100
                                          2213 SGN:SKP:MSG CMD=3,TYPE=15
                                          2217 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2222 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=255,c=0,t=17,pt=0,l=10,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:2.2.0-beta
                                          2232 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2234 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=255,c=3,t=6,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:0
                                          2248 TSF:MSG:READ,0-0-101,s=255,c=3,t=6,pt=0,l=1,sg=0:M
                                          2254 !SGN:VER:NSG
                                          2256 !TSF:MSG:SIGN VERIFY FAIL
                                          2258 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2263 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=255,c=3,t=11,pt=0,l=13,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:Motion Sensor
                                          2273 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2277 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=255,c=3,t=12,pt=0,l=3,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:1.0
                                          2285 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2289 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=1,c=0,t=1,pt=0,l=0,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:
                                          2295 MCO:REG:REQ
                                          2297 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2301 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=255,c=3,t=26,pt=1,l=1,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:2
                                          2310 TSF:MSG:READ,0-0-101,s=255,c=3,t=27,pt=1,l=1,sg=0:1
                                          2316 !SGN:VER:NSG
                                          2318 !TSF:MSG:SIGN VERIFY FAIL
                                          2322 MCO:BGN:STP
                                          2324 MCO:BGN:INIT OK,TSP=1
                                          1
                                          2326 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2330 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=1,c=1,t=16,pt=0,l=1,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:1
                                          2338 MCO:SLP:MS=120000,SMS=0,I1=1,M1=1,I2=255,M2=255
                                          2344 TSF:TDI:TSL
                                          2347 MCO:SLP:WUP=1
                                          2349 TSF:TRI:TSB
                                          0
                                          2351 SGN:SGN:NREQ=0
                                          2355 TSF:MSG:SEND,101-101-0-0,s=1,c=1,t=16,pt=0,l=1,sg=0,ft=0,st=OK:0
                                          2363 MCO:SLP:MS=120000,SMS=0,I1=1,M1=1,I2=255,M2=255
                                          2367 TSF:TDI:TSL
                                          
                                          
                                          AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          8

                                          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