Hi all, I think some of us have totally missed the point. Your competitor is not going to sit down and try to crack your chip. He is going to send it to a slimy company that have already worked out how to see into your type of chip and they will charge a pittance for ripping it off. This is a business. They charge their clients a few thousand dollars for a few minutes work. This IS a global problem and one that Chip manufacturers need to seriously adress. Dont tell me how difficult it is to find a way into a chip. You only have to do it once then set up in business. Your code is worth max 10K usd. What is it worth to your competitor. Being as it is only a few minutes work to the copy company you can probably bargain the price down too. This is a real problem and one that will not go away through wishful thinking. George Powell Hi all, Dear people, I don't want to discuss about governments, back doors, etc. We all know that exists expensive procedures to unprotect devices, but they are EXPENSIVES and in most cases exceeds the development expense. If I really want to protect my intellectual property in all circumstances, I should use a tamper proof device. But I want to use the LPC2104 because of it's price and features. According to LPC2114 data sheet and like Pete wrote, code read protection in LPC2114 is available since bootloader revision 1.61 But this device is more expensive than the LPC2104. I can't believe that the LPC2104 doesn't have the same feature. Please, could somebody tell me if the LPC2104 have code read protection?. Thanks all Armando Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpc2000/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Message
Re: [lpc2000] Re: Flash Security
2004-09-16 by George Powell
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.