Re: [lpc2000] Digest Number 96
2004-02-22 by Bill Wiese
Hi Brian... >> [Bill Wiese wrote:] >> While code protection is "nice", you shouldn't count >> on it 100% and bet your future on it. Licensing >> contracts, patents, etc. also have their roles. > [Brian Lane wrote:] > That is true, but doesn't help you at all when some anonymous > chinese company clones your new widget. It also doesn't help > much if you don't have 100k budgeted for lawyers to enforce > your patents. > I have no faith in protection offered by patents or contracts. > I need to keep my code as secure as possible, given the > application and distribution of the device. Yeah, I know. A patent is really just the "right to sue". And if you let something slide by not defending it (because of time or financial constraints) that can work against your patent because you "allowed" it to happen. >>[Bill Wiese wrote:] >> A few years ago, in a past life doing reverse engineering, >> I managed to dump data from variety of 'secure' CPU ROMs, >> including oddball Japanese parts.... >[Brian Lane wrote:] > I've never done any of that, but it sure sounds like an > interesting challenge. I have been surprised at the abuse > I can sometimes expose a chip to and have it survive :) It was a LOT of fun. (Mostly for tweaking engine control firmware.) In lotsa chip co's you'll see decapped ICs hanging around an engineer's desk - on a working prototyping PCB. Say the chip has a bad subsystem (i.e., jams the bus or gets really happy issuing interrupts). Rather than take time to re-spin new silicon, a small batch of chips will get the troublesome subsystems deactivated via FIB work (Focused Ion Beam ?) and maybe even a couple of metal patches and the rest of the chip can be tested/exercised. With passivation layer removed oxidiation can take place but at least you have a chip that can be exercised for a bit.. >>[Bill Wiese wrote:] >>And the attacker has to figure out the same thing in >>reverse: how much effort is this task worth? >[Brian Lane wrote:] > That's the bottom line. And the LPC doesn't provide anything > that would prevent someone from cloning the chip using the > JTAG interface. You can cut the pins, but that introduces > extra assembly cost, and how hard is it to scrape off some > of the chip's plastic and re-attach to them? > > Plans for future code protection in the LPC don't help us now. > And they are likely to be an after-thought when it ought to > have been included from the start. You do have to know that the LPC21xx parts are intended as low-cost microcontrollers - that is, 32-bit successors to 8051-like devices. They're not positioned as ARM "system chips" like other ARM devices. In the grand scheme of things the ARM CPU core itself prob doesn't take much more die space than an 8051 core. The flash (charge pumps) and RAM will take more area, so the ARM core is a cheap way of selling more silicon ;) The co's Philips is catering to are usu bulk buyers/bigger co's, so little guys' complaints are prob not on the radar screen. Big guys can use their legal prowess to avoid your issues.... Bill Wiese San Jose CA __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools