|
I have heard that there is a way to protect the flash on the DSP56F8xx devices by overvoltaging the TDO line on the JTAG port. This would keep any information from being pulled out of the device via the JTAG interface. If there was no other loading mechanism in the bootloader flash, the device would be one time programmable after blowing the JTAG TDO line. Does anyone have any further information about how to blow the JTAG TDO line w/o damaging the part? What voltage and current limit was used to blow the TDO line? Is anyone using this method in production quantities with no problems? Thanks to anyone that can help! |
|
|
Protecting Flash memory on DSP56F80x devices
Started by ●March 1, 2002
Reply by ●March 5, 20022002-03-05
|
Hi there, I am new to Motorola DSP, but this method of code protection seems a bit risky. If you do find some additional information on this subject, please let me know. Why not use the standard code protection features. I have not played around with it, but it should do the trick, shouldn't it? Regards Roelof Oelofsen Telkom Laboratories Telkom SA >>> "chet_kaufman" <> 03/01/02 10:49PM >> |
Reply by ●March 5, 20022002-03-05
|
We had a lot of contact with Motorola during our design with the
DSP56F803 and were told time and again there was no possibility to add code protection. There are no standard code protection features. That being said, if they did sneak this capability into the final design, we'd sure be very interested in using it. -----Original Message----- From: Roelof Oelofsen [mailto:] Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 9:51 PM To: ; Subject: Re: [motoroladsp] Protecting Flash memory on DSP56F80x devices Hi there, I am new to Motorola DSP, but this method of code protection seems a bit risky. If you do find some additional information on this subject, please let me know. Why not use the standard code protection features. I have not played around with it, but it should do the trick, shouldn't it? Regards Roelof Oelofsen Telkom Laboratories Telkom SA >>> "chet_kaufman" <> 03/01/02 10:49PM >> _____________________________________ Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer to be distributed to the entire group. _____________________________________ About this discussion group: To Join: To Post: To Leave: Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3 ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ |
Reply by ●March 6, 20022002-03-06
|
Could you give me additional information about code protection. I know that 56800x have no code protection. Thanks --------------------------------- Giuliano Tognon tel: +39-0444-440061 Software department fax: +39-0444-440229 Quality in Electronic Manufacturing srl e-mail: Mail: SS11, LocalitSignolo web: www.qem.it 36054 Montebello Vic.no (VI) ITALY --------------------------------- "Roelof Oelofsen" <oelofsrp@telkom. To: <>, co.za> <> cc: 05/03/2002 06.51 Subject: Re: [motoroladsp] Protecting Flash memory on DSP56F80x devices Hi there, I am new to Motorola DSP, but this method of code protection seems a bit risky. If you do find some additional information on this subject, please let me know. Why not use the standard code protection features. I have not played around with it, but it should do the trick, shouldn't it? Regards Roelof Oelofsen Telkom Laboratories Telkom SA >>> "chet_kaufman" <> 03/01/02 10:49PM >> _____________________________________ Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer to be distributed to the entire group. _____________________________________ About this discussion group: To Join: To Post: To Leave: Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3 ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ |
Reply by ●March 7, 20022002-03-07
|
There is absolutely no way any DSP56800 family derivative can implement security for the flash. It is an inherent limitation of the design based on the original market the core was designed for. There's no way security could have been snuck into the final design. That being said, popping the TDO pin is an interesting solution, but I would not recommend it, as it would void any warranty from Motorola for the device. The DSP56800E devices has should have security implemented from the git go because of all the requests Motorola has been getting for security in the 56800's. Believe it or not, the DSP56300 core has the ability for security designed in but absolutely none of the derivative devices have ever implemented it in all the years they've been out. It's also a very seldom requested feature on those devices in comparison to the DSP56800's... --david _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx |
Reply by ●March 7, 20022002-03-07
|
Hi Giuliano, I apologize for my assumption that the 56f8xx have code protection capabilities. The more experienced guys on this forum have prooved me wrong. We went to a Motorola seminar last year that introduced some of their 8-bit devices, and because they have code protection, I assumed that the superior 56f8xx would have code protection as well. Like I said previously, I have only started to use the device now, I am still learning the SDK features, never mind the code protection! Kind regards Roelof Oelofsen Telkom Development Laboratory Telkom SA >>> <> 03/06/02 09:10AM >>> |
Reply by ●March 7, 20022002-03-07
|
Ok, but does anyone have a good idea to protect flash program. I work in single chip mode with a 56805 and I could spend about $0.5 for additional components. For additional components I intend an external chip that communicate with micro and the firmware can check if the key if good. Regards, --------------------------------- Giuliano Tognon tel: +39-0444-440061 Software department fax: +39-0444-440229 Quality in Electronic Manufacturing srl e-mail: Mail: SS11, LocalitSignolo web: www.qem.it 36054 Montebello Vic.no (VI) ITALY --------------------------------- Simon Lightbody <Simon.Lightbody@ To: "'Roelof Oelofsen'" <>, pwrm.com> , 05/03/2002 21.00 cc: Subject: RE: [motoroladsp] Protecting Flash memory on DSP56F80x devices We had a lot of contact with Motorola during our design with the DSP56F803 and were told time and again there was no possibility to add code protection. There are no standard code protection features. That being said, if they did sneak this capability into the final design, we'd sure be very interested in using it. -----Original Message----- From: Roelof Oelofsen [mailto:] Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 9:51 PM To: ; Subject: Re: [motoroladsp] Protecting Flash memory on DSP56F80x devices Hi there, I am new to Motorola DSP, but this method of code protection seems a bit risky. If you do find some additional information on this subject, please let me know. Why not use the standard code protection features. I have not played around with it, but it should do the trick, shouldn't it? Regards Roelof Oelofsen Telkom Laboratories Telkom SA >>> "chet_kaufman" <> 03/01/02 10:49PM >> _____________________________________ Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer to be distributed to the entire group. _____________________________________ About this discussion group: To Join: To Post: To Leave: Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3 ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ _____________________________________ Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer to be distributed to the entire group. _____________________________________ About this discussion group: To Join: To Post: To Leave: Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3 ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ |
Reply by ●March 7, 20022002-03-07
|
Why not damage the Jtag pins electronically in a safe way to protect
code?Of course I have not tried it, but if the code was important, I would try it. Han Cicimen e-mail: web address: http://www.cizgi.net Address:Cizgi Muhendislik San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Sti. Havuzbasi Cad. No:21/1 81610 Kavacik Istanbul TURKEY Tel: 90 216 4250943 Fax: 90 216 4251011 ----- Original Message ----- From: Roelof Oelofsen <> To: <> Cc: <>; <> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 7:46 AM Subject: Re: [motoroladsp] Protecting Flash memory on DSP56F80x devices > Hi Giuliano, > > I apologize for my assumption that the 56f8xx have code protection > capabilities. The more experienced guys on this forum have prooved me > wrong. > We went to a Motorola seminar last year that introduced some of their > 8-bit devices, and because they have code protection, I assumed that the > superior 56f8xx would have code protection as well. > > Like I said previously, I have only started to use the device now, I am > still learning the SDK features, never mind the code protection! > > Kind regards > Roelof Oelofsen > Telkom Development Laboratory > Telkom SA > > >>> <> 03/06/02 09:10AM >> > > _____________________________________ > Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer to be distributed to the entire group. > > _____________________________________ > About this discussion group: > > To Join: > > To Post: > > To Leave: > > Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp > > More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3 > ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > |
Reply by ●March 7, 20022002-03-07
|
Hi all, The electronic protection is very interesting. Maybe you can use a SMT fuse with zener diode combination. If the voltage on the pin goes above the diode threshold the fuse will blow and the JTAG connector will be disconnected from the DSP pins. I do not know how effective this will be though. Roelof Telkom Laboratories Telkom SA >>> "Han Cicimen" <> 03/07/02 09:47AM >>> |
Reply by ●March 7, 20022002-03-07
|
I can't tell you much more than what you could tell by looking at our product... We used a DS2432 from http://www.dalsemi.com. Not as good as built in security, but better than nothing. Plus, it only requires one I/O pin. -----Original Message----- From: [mailto:] Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 11:26 PM To: Subject: RE: [motoroladsp] Protecting Flash memory on DSP56F80x devices Ok, but does anyone have a good idea to protect flash program. I work in single chip mode with a 56805 and I could spend about $0.5 for additional components. For additional components I intend an external chip that communicate with micro and the firmware can check if the key if good. Regards, --------------------------------- Giuliano Tognon tel: +39-0444-440061 Software department fax: +39-0444-440229 Quality in Electronic Manufacturing srl e-mail: Mail: SS11, LocalitSignolo web: www.qem.it 36054 Montebello Vic.no (VI) ITALY --------------------------------- Simon Lightbody <Simon.Lightbody@ To: "'Roelof Oelofsen'" <>, pwrm.com> , 05/03/2002 21.00 cc: Subject: RE: [motoroladsp] Protecting Flash memory on DSP56F80x devices We had a lot of contact with Motorola during our design with the DSP56F803 and were told time and again there was no possibility to add code protection. There are no standard code protection features. That being said, if they did sneak this capability into the final design, we'd sure be very interested in using it. -----Original Message----- From: Roelof Oelofsen [mailto:] Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 9:51 PM To: ; Subject: Re: [motoroladsp] Protecting Flash memory on DSP56F80x devices Hi there, I am new to Motorola DSP, but this method of code protection seems a bit risky. If you do find some additional information on this subject, please let me know. Why not use the standard code protection features. I have not played around with it, but it should do the trick, shouldn't it? Regards Roelof Oelofsen Telkom Laboratories Telkom SA >>> "chet_kaufman" <> 03/01/02 10:49PM >> _____________________________________ Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer to be distributed to the entire group. _____________________________________ About this discussion group: To Join: To Post: To Leave: Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3 ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ _____________________________________ Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer to be distributed to the entire group. _____________________________________ About this discussion group: To Join: To Post: To Leave: Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3 ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ _____________________________________ Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer to be distributed to the entire group. _____________________________________ About this discussion group: To Join: To Post: To Leave: Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3 ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ |
