Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Strange behaviour of CYW920819EVB-02 #44

Open
AntonFirc opened this issue Apr 1, 2021 · 4 comments
Open

Strange behaviour of CYW920819EVB-02 #44

AntonFirc opened this issue Apr 1, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@AntonFirc
Copy link

Hello,

I noticed that when using the CYW920819EVB-02 dev board with internalblue on linux, the chip identifier has a strange value of 0x2305, and the initialisation then falls back to using default fw.py file.

I browsed trough the available files and identified that the fw_0x220c.py should contain the values for this board, thus I copied the file and renamed it to fw_0x2305.py to get matched with the board. However I am not sure that this approach is correct as well as the values.

My questions thus is, why does the chip identifier differ?

Thank you very much!

@jiska2342
Copy link
Member

Looks like you got a chip with a more recent patch level :) Ideally, it should have the same ROM, so you can simply copy the file as you did. The most important definitions in the firmware file define the memory layout and functions in the ROM, which will not change with firmware updates.

On the evaluation boards, the patches, which are usually shipped as .hcd file, are contained in a separate flash memory on the board itself. Thus, if Cypress applied a newer patch level during the manufacturing process within that flash or if you installed a new version of the Cypress toolchain and applied those patches, the version number differs, even if you do not active load a .hcd file during chip initialization via Linux.

@AntonFirc
Copy link
Author

Ah, thanks for the explanation..I'm a little wiser again :)

Is there a way to verify that the ROM layout remained the same as in fw_0x220c.py? I'm currently experiencing some difficulties executing BIAS, so I'm wondering whether the different chip version might be the problem.

@SDMJH
Copy link

SDMJH commented Apr 16, 2021

Ah, thanks for the explanation..I'm a little wiser again :)

Is there a way to verify that the ROM layout remained the same as in fw_0x220c.py? I'm currently experiencing some difficulties executing BIAS, so I'm wondering whether the different chip version might be the problem.

hello,
I also want to perform bias attack and i encountered the same problem as you, do you know how to solve it ?
thank you!

@hnznhr
Copy link

hnznhr commented Dec 12, 2023

hello,
I also want to perform bias attack and i encountered the same problem as you, do you know how to solve it ?
By the way, I use CYW920819EVB-01.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants