Skip to content
  • 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. OpenHardware.io
  3. 💬 Sensebender Gateway
  • Getting Started
  • Controller
  • Build
  • Hardware
  • Download/API
  • Forum
  • Store

💬 Sensebender Gateway

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved OpenHardware.io
mysensorsgatewaysamd
382 Posts 59 Posters 151.2k Views 53 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.
  • magpernM Offline
    magpernM Offline
    magpern
    wrote on last edited by
    #281

    Is it really correct that orange, green and red led should light constantly when powered on. On some activity from the sensors the leds blink, but goes to full constant light directly.

    An other thing, inclusion button. In sketch this is commented out, should it?

    // Digital pin used for inclusion mode button
    //#define MY_INCLUSION_MODE_BUTTON_PIN  3
    
    

    For me it is like GW is in constant inclusion mode. Gateway seams to work, it shows up in controller, and as soon as a sensor is powered up, it automatically also appears in controller... feels very unsecure. Just give power to a random sensor and it is in my controller.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • hekH Offline
      hekH Offline
      hek
      Admin
      wrote on last edited by
      #282

      @Magnus-Pernemark

      You can reverse the led behaviour by defining:

      #define MY_WITH_LEDS_BLINKING_INVERSE

      Presentation messages is always forwarded to controller. Inclusion mode must be implemented/supported by the controller for it to work.

      magpernM 1 Reply Last reply
      1
      • hekH hek

        @Magnus-Pernemark

        You can reverse the led behaviour by defining:

        #define MY_WITH_LEDS_BLINKING_INVERSE

        Presentation messages is always forwarded to controller. Inclusion mode must be implemented/supported by the controller for it to work.

        magpernM Offline
        magpernM Offline
        magpern
        wrote on last edited by
        #283

        @hek Thanks, I'll try that. The controller is Domoticz. Does Domoticz have a flaw when it comes to inclusion? (I guess it must have, since any random sensor gets included automatically).

        AnticimexA alexsh1A 2 Replies Last reply
        0
        • magpernM magpern

          @hek Thanks, I'll try that. The controller is Domoticz. Does Domoticz have a flaw when it comes to inclusion? (I guess it must have, since any random sensor gets included automatically).

          AnticimexA Offline
          AnticimexA Offline
          Anticimex
          Contest Winner
          wrote on last edited by
          #284

          @Magnus-Pernemark I am not sure domoticz support inclusion at all.

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

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • magpernM magpern

            @hek Thanks, I'll try that. The controller is Domoticz. Does Domoticz have a flaw when it comes to inclusion? (I guess it must have, since any random sensor gets included automatically).

            alexsh1A Offline
            alexsh1A Offline
            alexsh1
            wrote on last edited by
            #285

            @Magnus-Pernemark inclusion mode is not for Domoticz but for Vera. For Domoticz if you want to secure your sensors you need to use signing between the sensors and the GW and reject any sensor without signing

            magpernM 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • alexsh1A alexsh1

              @Magnus-Pernemark inclusion mode is not for Domoticz but for Vera. For Domoticz if you want to secure your sensors you need to use signing between the sensors and the GW and reject any sensor without signing

              magpernM Offline
              magpernM Offline
              magpern
              wrote on last edited by
              #286

              @alexsh1 Feels like this could be changed, so inclusion also would work for domoticz. A also have a z-wave module hooked up to domoticz and for the z-wave there is inclusion. Just have to find the right person for it :)

              Yes the signing. I have tried. I want everything on the mysensors network to use signing, I have enabled the MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204, all sensors have the same keys in the chip. Is it using the signing if I have done this? I will try and hook up a sensor without the correct keys and see what happens. Just have to solder it first.

              AnticimexA alexsh1A 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • magpernM magpern

                @alexsh1 Feels like this could be changed, so inclusion also would work for domoticz. A also have a z-wave module hooked up to domoticz and for the z-wave there is inclusion. Just have to find the right person for it :)

                Yes the signing. I have tried. I want everything on the mysensors network to use signing, I have enabled the MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204, all sensors have the same keys in the chip. Is it using the signing if I have done this? I will try and hook up a sensor without the correct keys and see what happens. Just have to solder it first.

                AnticimexA Offline
                AnticimexA Offline
                Anticimex
                Contest Winner
                wrote on last edited by
                #287

                @Magnus-Pernemark there is quite extensive documentation on how to use signing. I presume you have read it? It's on the homepage (and the forum). You need to enable a signing backend and you need to enable requirement for signatures if your node is to require it (signing does not have to go both ways).
                So no, if you have only personalized your atsha devices and enabled the atsha backend, it does not mean signing is enabled unless you on at least one node or gw have enabled MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNARURES.

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

                magpernM 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • AnticimexA Anticimex

                  @Magnus-Pernemark there is quite extensive documentation on how to use signing. I presume you have read it? It's on the homepage (and the forum). You need to enable a signing backend and you need to enable requirement for signatures if your node is to require it (signing does not have to go both ways).
                  So no, if you have only personalized your atsha devices and enabled the atsha backend, it does not mean signing is enabled unless you on at least one node or gw have enabled MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNARURES.

                  magpernM Offline
                  magpernM Offline
                  magpern
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #288

                  @Anticimex Thanks. Yes I have read it and read it and read it... doesn't mean I understand it or know what to do, unfortunately. At this point I am only using the standard examples, the standard GWserial and standard sensebender micro sketch. Without modifications, except for the MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204.
                  It is so much to go through.

                  AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • magpernM magpern

                    @Anticimex Thanks. Yes I have read it and read it and read it... doesn't mean I understand it or know what to do, unfortunately. At this point I am only using the standard examples, the standard GWserial and standard sensebender micro sketch. Without modifications, except for the MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204.
                    It is so much to go through.

                    AnticimexA Offline
                    AnticimexA Offline
                    Anticimex
                    Contest Winner
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #289

                    @Magnus-Pernemark then you support signing, but you don't use it.
                    There are several examples in the documentation which in code showes exactly what you need to define for various use cases.

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

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • magpernM magpern

                      @alexsh1 Feels like this could be changed, so inclusion also would work for domoticz. A also have a z-wave module hooked up to domoticz and for the z-wave there is inclusion. Just have to find the right person for it :)

                      Yes the signing. I have tried. I want everything on the mysensors network to use signing, I have enabled the MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204, all sensors have the same keys in the chip. Is it using the signing if I have done this? I will try and hook up a sensor without the correct keys and see what happens. Just have to solder it first.

                      alexsh1A Offline
                      alexsh1A Offline
                      alexsh1
                      wrote on last edited by alexsh1
                      #290

                      @Magnus-Pernemark said in 💬 Sensebender Gateway:

                      @alexsh1 Feels like this could be changed, so inclusion also would work for domoticz. A also have a z-wave module hooked up to domoticz and for the z-wave there is inclusion. Just have to find the right person for it :)

                      z-wave in Domoticz is based on OpenZWave and z-wave protocol does require inclusion / exclusion. MySensors are natively supported by Domoticz and personally I do not see why inclusion/exclusion should be there. If you want security, please use signing.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • tbowmoT Offline
                        tbowmoT Offline
                        tbowmo
                        Admin
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #291

                        @Magnus-Pernemark

                        You can disable domoticz automatic inclusion of new devices on the mysensors network, somewhere in the settings..

                        magpernM 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • tbowmoT tbowmo

                          @Magnus-Pernemark

                          You can disable domoticz automatic inclusion of new devices on the mysensors network, somewhere in the settings..

                          magpernM Offline
                          magpernM Offline
                          magpern
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #292

                          @tbowmo Ah, found a setting ""Accept new hardware/sensors" and a button for "allow for 5 minutes" that could be used as a global "include"-button

                          @alexsh1 well, maybe, maybe not. Don't know if I agree about not having an inclusion. Almost every device you buy you have to "pair" with something. Anyway, for now disable "allow new hardware/sensors" will do.

                          @Anticimex I will re-read everything and test stuff now when I have a GW and two nodes to play with.
                          A quick question - Is it possible to have the gateway to allow soft signing for some nodes (those without a ATSHA) and hardware signing for those with and reject everything else?

                          I found this sentence:

                          It is legal to mix MySigningAtsha204 and MySigningAtsha204Soft backends in a network. They work together.
                          

                          The word backend is in plural, does it mean I need one GW with ATSHA and another with soft signing?

                          AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • magpernM magpern

                            @tbowmo Ah, found a setting ""Accept new hardware/sensors" and a button for "allow for 5 minutes" that could be used as a global "include"-button

                            @alexsh1 well, maybe, maybe not. Don't know if I agree about not having an inclusion. Almost every device you buy you have to "pair" with something. Anyway, for now disable "allow new hardware/sensors" will do.

                            @Anticimex I will re-read everything and test stuff now when I have a GW and two nodes to play with.
                            A quick question - Is it possible to have the gateway to allow soft signing for some nodes (those without a ATSHA) and hardware signing for those with and reject everything else?

                            I found this sentence:

                            It is legal to mix MySigningAtsha204 and MySigningAtsha204Soft backends in a network. They work together.
                            

                            The word backend is in plural, does it mean I need one GW with ATSHA and another with soft signing?

                            AnticimexA Offline
                            AnticimexA Offline
                            Anticimex
                            Contest Winner
                            wrote on last edited by Anticimex
                            #293

                            @Magnus-Pernemark it means literally what it says. You can mix nodes. They are fully compatible. You can have a gw with a atsha204a device using atsha backend communicating securely with a node using soft signing. Or have a node with atsha204a device and atsha backend communicate with a gw with soft signing. You could even have a node or gw with atsha204a device configured for soft signing (although that is a waste since you have hw backed support in that case which is more secure since the hmac key is readout protected). The ONLY compatibility requirement between ANY node or gw in a network is that they MUST share the same HMAC key. That's it.

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

                            magpernM 1 Reply Last reply
                            1
                            • AnticimexA Anticimex

                              @Magnus-Pernemark it means literally what it says. You can mix nodes. They are fully compatible. You can have a gw with a atsha204a device using atsha backend communicating securely with a node using soft signing. Or have a node with atsha204a device and atsha backend communicate with a gw with soft signing. You could even have a node or gw with atsha204a device configured for soft signing (although that is a waste since you have hw backed support in that case which is more secure since the hmac key is readout protected). The ONLY compatibility requirement between ANY node or gw in a network is that they MUST share the same HMAC key. That's it.

                              magpernM Offline
                              magpernM Offline
                              magpern
                              wrote on last edited by magpern
                              #294

                              @Anticimex Thanks again. So, really, to have hardware and software at the same time exposes the hardware key in the nodes that have soft signing, since all nodes need same HMAC, regardless of HW or SW.

                              I enabled MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204 and MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES in the gateway
                              What I understand, this should activate signing (https://www.mysensors.org/about/signing and the "How to use this" part)

                              I then took a bender with the same ATSHA keys, but without "MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204". It showed up in MYSController and reported temp. I changed the key in ATSHA to something other then the GW, it still shows up and reports the temp. So, clearly there must be something else to change as well?

                              I read this in the documentation: "If this [MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES] is set in a gateway, it will NOT force all nodes to sign messages to it. It will only require signatures from nodes that in turn require signatures."
                              I intemperate this as, the gateway will require signatures, if the node says so, but it will talk to nodes that don't require signing too.

                              All sketches are the default example sketches, except for the setting of the MY_SIGNING...

                              Maybe I am over-shooting the target? What I'm after is: my devices are mine alone and they should only report to me. My receiver (GW) should only listen to my devices and ignore the neighbor's devices. The neighbor should not be able to talk to my devices.

                              AnticimexA alexsh1A 2 Replies Last reply
                              0
                              • magpernM magpern

                                @Anticimex Thanks again. So, really, to have hardware and software at the same time exposes the hardware key in the nodes that have soft signing, since all nodes need same HMAC, regardless of HW or SW.

                                I enabled MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204 and MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES in the gateway
                                What I understand, this should activate signing (https://www.mysensors.org/about/signing and the "How to use this" part)

                                I then took a bender with the same ATSHA keys, but without "MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204". It showed up in MYSController and reported temp. I changed the key in ATSHA to something other then the GW, it still shows up and reports the temp. So, clearly there must be something else to change as well?

                                I read this in the documentation: "If this [MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES] is set in a gateway, it will NOT force all nodes to sign messages to it. It will only require signatures from nodes that in turn require signatures."
                                I intemperate this as, the gateway will require signatures, if the node says so, but it will talk to nodes that don't require signing too.

                                All sketches are the default example sketches, except for the setting of the MY_SIGNING...

                                Maybe I am over-shooting the target? What I'm after is: my devices are mine alone and they should only report to me. My receiver (GW) should only listen to my devices and ignore the neighbor's devices. The neighbor should not be able to talk to my devices.

                                AnticimexA Offline
                                AnticimexA Offline
                                Anticimex
                                Contest Winner
                                wrote on last edited by Anticimex
                                #295

                                @Magnus-Pernemark if you are on master, yes, then a node has to require signing to make the GW require it. On development (beta) gw will require signatures from everyone if it is set to require signatures (unless a specific flag is set).
                                Doxygen holds the the current documentation for master and development.

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

                                AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • magpernM magpern

                                  @Anticimex Thanks again. So, really, to have hardware and software at the same time exposes the hardware key in the nodes that have soft signing, since all nodes need same HMAC, regardless of HW or SW.

                                  I enabled MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204 and MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES in the gateway
                                  What I understand, this should activate signing (https://www.mysensors.org/about/signing and the "How to use this" part)

                                  I then took a bender with the same ATSHA keys, but without "MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204". It showed up in MYSController and reported temp. I changed the key in ATSHA to something other then the GW, it still shows up and reports the temp. So, clearly there must be something else to change as well?

                                  I read this in the documentation: "If this [MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES] is set in a gateway, it will NOT force all nodes to sign messages to it. It will only require signatures from nodes that in turn require signatures."
                                  I intemperate this as, the gateway will require signatures, if the node says so, but it will talk to nodes that don't require signing too.

                                  All sketches are the default example sketches, except for the setting of the MY_SIGNING...

                                  Maybe I am over-shooting the target? What I'm after is: my devices are mine alone and they should only report to me. My receiver (GW) should only listen to my devices and ignore the neighbor's devices. The neighbor should not be able to talk to my devices.

                                  alexsh1A Offline
                                  alexsh1A Offline
                                  alexsh1
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #296

                                  @Magnus-Pernemark I would suggest you move the signing discussion into a corresponding thread. Other people may benefit reading what you have gone through 😁

                                  AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • AnticimexA Anticimex

                                    @Magnus-Pernemark if you are on master, yes, then a node has to require signing to make the GW require it. On development (beta) gw will require signatures from everyone if it is set to require signatures (unless a specific flag is set).
                                    Doxygen holds the the current documentation for master and development.

                                    AnticimexA Offline
                                    AnticimexA Offline
                                    Anticimex
                                    Contest Winner
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #297

                                    And yes, if you have nodes "exposed" you should make sure those are using atsha204a backed signing if you are afraid they might get physically abused.

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

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • alexsh1A alexsh1

                                      @Magnus-Pernemark I would suggest you move the signing discussion into a corresponding thread. Other people may benefit reading what you have gone through 😁

                                      AnticimexA Offline
                                      AnticimexA Offline
                                      Anticimex
                                      Contest Winner
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #298

                                      @alexsh1 @Magnus-Pernemark indeed. There is a long running one here: https://forum.mysensors.org/topic/1021/security-introducing-signing-support-to-mysensors/

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

                                      magpernM 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • AnticimexA Anticimex

                                        @alexsh1 @Magnus-Pernemark indeed. There is a long running one here: https://forum.mysensors.org/topic/1021/security-introducing-signing-support-to-mysensors/

                                        magpernM Offline
                                        magpernM Offline
                                        magpern
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #299

                                        @Anticimex @alexsh1 yes should be in other thread. It started with a gateway question and migrated to a signing question. This will be the last one here, since I give up now. I will focus on building a network, and secure it later.

                                        I'm on development branch, so I guess I just need that "specific flag". Couldn't find it in the documentation. I have it set up as the document in doxygen says, and GW should reject unsigned messages or wrong signing, documentation says, but it doesn't... Even nodes that have a different key and MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204 set, talks to the GW and reports temp.

                                        I'll wait until beta is released

                                        alexsh1A AnticimexA 2 Replies Last reply
                                        0
                                        • magpernM magpern

                                          @Anticimex @alexsh1 yes should be in other thread. It started with a gateway question and migrated to a signing question. This will be the last one here, since I give up now. I will focus on building a network, and secure it later.

                                          I'm on development branch, so I guess I just need that "specific flag". Couldn't find it in the documentation. I have it set up as the document in doxygen says, and GW should reject unsigned messages or wrong signing, documentation says, but it doesn't... Even nodes that have a different key and MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204 set, talks to the GW and reports temp.

                                          I'll wait until beta is released

                                          alexsh1A Offline
                                          alexsh1A Offline
                                          alexsh1
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #300

                                          @Magnus-Pernemark
                                          This is very simple. On the dev version:

                                          GW (assuming you have atsha204 or use soft signing?)
                                          MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204
                                          MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES

                                          On a node (assuming you have hardware atsha204?):
                                          MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204

                                          This is it.

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


                                          5

                                          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
                                          • OpenHardware.io
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular