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. Announcements
  3. 💬 Security & Signing

💬 Security & Signing

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Announcements
137 Posts 20 Posters 17.5k Views 19 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.
  • E egadgetjnr

    Hi Guys,
    Long time reader and first time poster.
    Now a general disclaimer, I'm only fairly new to the IoT world of home automation sensors and am looking at the crypto side of signing devices as I thought if I'm going to do it, I'm going to do it right from the start with signing and utilizing OTA abilities.

    I have a quick question regarding the ATSHA204 component. I know that the SenseBender uses a ATSHA204-STUCZ (the Single-Wire interface config) but I can't get these sourced through my normal supplier.

    I am able to source ATSHA204A-SSHDA-B though, and was wondering if this would work instead, even though it's an I2C interface config instead. If not, how much work is involved to get it to work?

    Thanks Heaps

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

    @egadgetjnr hi and welcome to the forum! It will require some work as the current driver only handles single wire interface and the I2C support in the chip has special requirements in the bus for sleep/wake states. I don't know how much work exactly is needed but it will not be insignificant.
    Also, what sources have you checked? It should be possible to source the single write variant online without problem.

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

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • E Offline
      E Offline
      egadgetjnr
      wrote on last edited by
      #14

      @Anticimex said in 💬 Security & Signing:

      Also, what sources have you checked? It should be possible to source the single write variant online without problem.

      Thanks heaps for your prompt reply!

      I've looked at Mouser and Digi-Key and they have a $60 minimum for free postage (I don't want to order 100 for free shipping at this stage obviously as I'm only prototyping) and I can't bring myself to spending $25 on shipping for around $5.00 of modules :frowning:.
      Which leaves me with my normal supplier of Element14 (formally Farnell) where I get free shipping regardless of order quantity. :wink: but they don't source the Single-Wire ones at all.

      I was going to put a post over on the OTA Flash forum as well as I'm having issues sourcing the AT25DF512C (it's been discontinued) and was looking at an ATAES132A (Datasheet <here> using an SPI interface) as I accidentally ordered some of them for another project and thought maybe it would be possible to combine both the security signing and OTA flash in the one component (Which is a HUGE assumption as to its use). As mentioned earlier, I'm still fairly new to the engineering side of hardware so I may be way off the mark.

      AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • TakeroT Offline
        TakeroT Offline
        Takero
        Hardware Contributor
        wrote on last edited by
        #15

        @egadgetjnr where dit u come from?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • E egadgetjnr

          @Anticimex said in 💬 Security & Signing:

          Also, what sources have you checked? It should be possible to source the single write variant online without problem.

          Thanks heaps for your prompt reply!

          I've looked at Mouser and Digi-Key and they have a $60 minimum for free postage (I don't want to order 100 for free shipping at this stage obviously as I'm only prototyping) and I can't bring myself to spending $25 on shipping for around $5.00 of modules :frowning:.
          Which leaves me with my normal supplier of Element14 (formally Farnell) where I get free shipping regardless of order quantity. :wink: but they don't source the Single-Wire ones at all.

          I was going to put a post over on the OTA Flash forum as well as I'm having issues sourcing the AT25DF512C (it's been discontinued) and was looking at an ATAES132A (Datasheet <here> using an SPI interface) as I accidentally ordered some of them for another project and thought maybe it would be possible to combine both the security signing and OTA flash in the one component (Which is a HUGE assumption as to its use). As mentioned earlier, I'm still fairly new to the engineering side of hardware so I may be way off the mark.

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

          @egadgetjnr Ok, well, if you are up to it, feel free to make a PR with I2C support. I do not have the bandwidth to implement that myself I am afraid, and I don't feel the gains are worth the efforts. I2C will put constraints on which pins to use, and of course it would also require two pins and not one.
          But I happily review any pull requests on the topic. If we get the support, it is just a bonus :)

          Regarding flash, it is not crucial that you get the exact same part (or even the same supplier). The important thing is that the interface is the same and that they share the same JEDEC identifier.

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

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • D Offline
            D Offline
            DavidZH
            wrote on last edited by DavidZH
            #17

            I had exactly the same issue. This UK eBay store sells them per 5. Not sure what they'll ask for sending them across the ocean.
            I got them from here (4 days from UK to NL). Got one up in my gateway and that works with a soft signing node. Should be good.

            1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • B Offline
              B Offline
              bilbolodz
              wrote on last edited by
              #18

              Just to be sure: SOFT_HMAC_KEY, SOFT_SERIAL is used for signing, AES_KEY is used for encryption. SOFT_HMAC_KEY, AES_KEY should be the same across all network nodes, SOFT_SERIAL should be different for every node?

              AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B bilbolodz

                Just to be sure: SOFT_HMAC_KEY, SOFT_SERIAL is used for signing, AES_KEY is used for encryption. SOFT_HMAC_KEY, AES_KEY should be the same across all network nodes, SOFT_SERIAL should be different for every node?

                AnticimexA Offline
                AnticimexA Offline
                Anticimex
                Contest Winner
                wrote on last edited by
                #19

                @bilbolodz this is quite clearly stated in the documentation, but in short yes. But AES and HMAC key should not be the same, as the encryption is not using initialization vectors so the key can be derived from analyzing the encrypted messages by someone with the adequate knowledge.

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

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • B Offline
                  B Offline
                  bilbolodz
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #20

                  I'm trying to start play with ATSHA204A signing. I've ATSHA204A-SSHCZ-T chip (8-lead SOIC single wire). I've connected chip pins: 4 - GND, 8 - VCC (5v), 5 - A3, I've added 100nF between 4 and 8 and 4K7 resistor between 5 and 8. I've loaded "near clear" SecurityPersonalizer sketch (only added #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN A3 #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204) but I've got:

                  Personalization sketch for MySensors usage.

                  Failed to wake device. Response: E7
                  Halting!

                  any ideas?

                  AnticimexA t3chieT 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • B bilbolodz

                    I'm trying to start play with ATSHA204A signing. I've ATSHA204A-SSHCZ-T chip (8-lead SOIC single wire). I've connected chip pins: 4 - GND, 8 - VCC (5v), 5 - A3, I've added 100nF between 4 and 8 and 4K7 resistor between 5 and 8. I've loaded "near clear" SecurityPersonalizer sketch (only added #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN A3 #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204) but I've got:

                    Personalization sketch for MySensors usage.

                    Failed to wake device. Response: E7
                    Halting!

                    any ideas?

                    AnticimexA Offline
                    AnticimexA Offline
                    Anticimex
                    Contest Winner
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #21

                    @bilbolodz hm, no. I have not tested on a 8-lead device. Should not be a difference but I can neither deny nor confirm. My best suggestion would be to have a look with an oscilloscope on the wire to confirm that the signal quality is good.

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

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M Offline
                      M Offline
                      melwinek
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #22

                      Is SIGNING a RFM69_ENABLE_ENCRYPTION replacement? If so is it a better or worse solution? Maybe RFM69_ENABLE_ENCRYPTION is enough?

                      mfalkviddM AnticimexA 2 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • M melwinek

                        Is SIGNING a RFM69_ENABLE_ENCRYPTION replacement? If so is it a better or worse solution? Maybe RFM69_ENABLE_ENCRYPTION is enough?

                        mfalkviddM Offline
                        mfalkviddM Offline
                        mfalkvidd
                        Mod
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #23

                        @melwinek encryption and signing have very different purpose.

                        Signing prevents other people from sending messages to control your nodes. Without signing, anyone with the right skill or software can take control of your nodes.

                        Encryption tries to hide the contents of the messages between your nodes. That does not prevent people from taking control of your nodes.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • M melwinek

                          Is SIGNING a RFM69_ENABLE_ENCRYPTION replacement? If so is it a better or worse solution? Maybe RFM69_ENABLE_ENCRYPTION is enough?

                          AnticimexA Offline
                          AnticimexA Offline
                          Anticimex
                          Contest Winner
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #24

                          @melwinek signing and encryption are two completely different things. And they can be enabled at the same time if so desired. Signing provides authentication and encryption provides obscurity.

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

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          1
                          • M Offline
                            M Offline
                            melwinek
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #25

                            @Anticimex, @mfalkvidd But with the use of encryption so easily no one will take control, must break the code.
                            So it is best to simultaneously encrypt (eg RFID tag serial number when opening the gate) and sign (eg gate open message)?

                            AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • M melwinek

                              @Anticimex, @mfalkvidd But with the use of encryption so easily no one will take control, must break the code.
                              So it is best to simultaneously encrypt (eg RFID tag serial number when opening the gate) and sign (eg gate open message)?

                              AnticimexA Offline
                              AnticimexA Offline
                              Anticimex
                              Contest Winner
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #26

                              @melwinek what prevents anyone from copying your encrypted message and record it. And then later send the same thing?
                              Encryption provides obscurity. You need signing for authentication. Signed messages cannot be repeated because they are always unique. Encryption does not necessarily guarantee that.

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

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • B bilbolodz

                                I'm trying to start play with ATSHA204A signing. I've ATSHA204A-SSHCZ-T chip (8-lead SOIC single wire). I've connected chip pins: 4 - GND, 8 - VCC (5v), 5 - A3, I've added 100nF between 4 and 8 and 4K7 resistor between 5 and 8. I've loaded "near clear" SecurityPersonalizer sketch (only added #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN A3 #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204) but I've got:

                                Personalization sketch for MySensors usage.

                                Failed to wake device. Response: E7
                                Halting!

                                any ideas?

                                t3chieT Offline
                                t3chieT Offline
                                t3chie
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #27

                                @bilbolodz I am getting the same message with a Sensebender Micro. I configured it for soft-signing with LOCK_CONFIGURATION enabled. Now I wanted to switch to hardware based signing.

                                Any way to unlock a locked configuration?

                                AnticimexA 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • t3chieT t3chie

                                  @bilbolodz I am getting the same message with a Sensebender Micro. I configured it for soft-signing with LOCK_CONFIGURATION enabled. Now I wanted to switch to hardware based signing.

                                  Any way to unlock a locked configuration?

                                  AnticimexA Offline
                                  AnticimexA Offline
                                  Anticimex
                                  Contest Winner
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #28

                                  @t3chie there is no configuration to lock for soft signing. Configuration locking only applies to atsha204a. And if locked it cannot be unlocked. And normally you shouldn't need to either as the default settings set are the one to use, and unless you have been very creative in hacking the personalizer that configured should work just fine.

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

                                  t3chieT 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • AnticimexA Anticimex

                                    @t3chie there is no configuration to lock for soft signing. Configuration locking only applies to atsha204a. And if locked it cannot be unlocked. And normally you shouldn't need to either as the default settings set are the one to use, and unless you have been very creative in hacking the personalizer that configured should work just fine.

                                    t3chieT Offline
                                    t3chieT Offline
                                    t3chie
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #29

                                    @Anticimex I tested first with softsigning but shortly after this realized that with soft signing the Sensebender has not enough space for debug messages.
                                    I rerun the personalizer to switch to hardware based signing and hit the "Failed to wake device. Response: E7" message.
                                    Played around and found that

                                    #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 17
                                    instead of
                                    #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 4

                                    made the personalizer happy again. I am still fighting with getting signing to work. Setting #define MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES and MY_SIGNING_GW_REQUEST_SIGNATURES_FROM_ALL did not get me going.

                                    AnticimexA 2 Replies Last reply
                                    0
                                    • t3chieT t3chie

                                      @Anticimex I tested first with softsigning but shortly after this realized that with soft signing the Sensebender has not enough space for debug messages.
                                      I rerun the personalizer to switch to hardware based signing and hit the "Failed to wake device. Response: E7" message.
                                      Played around and found that

                                      #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 17
                                      instead of
                                      #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 4

                                      made the personalizer happy again. I am still fighting with getting signing to work. Setting #define MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES and MY_SIGNING_GW_REQUEST_SIGNATURES_FROM_ALL did not get me going.

                                      AnticimexA Offline
                                      AnticimexA Offline
                                      Anticimex
                                      Contest Winner
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #30

                                      @t3chie I assume you have personalized nodes and gw with the same hmac key?

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

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • t3chieT t3chie

                                        @Anticimex I tested first with softsigning but shortly after this realized that with soft signing the Sensebender has not enough space for debug messages.
                                        I rerun the personalizer to switch to hardware based signing and hit the "Failed to wake device. Response: E7" message.
                                        Played around and found that

                                        #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 17
                                        instead of
                                        #define MY_SIGNING_ATSHA204_PIN 4

                                        made the personalizer happy again. I am still fighting with getting signing to work. Setting #define MY_SIGNING_REQUEST_SIGNATURES and MY_SIGNING_GW_REQUEST_SIGNATURES_FROM_ALL did not get me going.

                                        AnticimexA Offline
                                        AnticimexA Offline
                                        Anticimex
                                        Contest Winner
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #31

                                        @t3chie also that you also defined the signing enabled flag on all participants (but I think you get a preprocessor error if you don't)

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

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • skywatchS Offline
                                          skywatchS Offline
                                          skywatch
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #32

                                          Is it possible to use the ATSHA204A along with the Rpi directly attached NRF24L01+ gateway? I can see how to attach the ATSHA to the nodes, but how to attach it to the pi?
                                          Thank you.

                                          AnticimexA 2 Replies Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          20

                                          Online

                                          11.7k

                                          Users

                                          11.2k

                                          Topics

                                          113.1k

                                          Posts


                                          Copyright 2025 TBD   |   Forum Guidelines   |   Privacy Policy   |   Terms of Service
                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • MySensors
                                          • OpenHardware.io
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular