[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5449355C.2060301@marcansoft.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 02:05:32 +0900
From: Hector Martin <hector@...cansoft.com>
To: Russ Dill <russ.dill@...il.com>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: serial: Perform verification for FTDI FT232R devices
On 23/10/14 23:14, Russ Dill wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Hector Martin <hector@...cansoft.com> wrote:
>> + write_eeprom(port, 0, eeprom_data[0]);
>> + write_eeprom(port, 1, 0);
>> + write_eeprom(port, eeprom_size - 2, eeprom_data[eeprom_size - 2]);
>> + write_eeprom(port, eeprom_size - 1, checksum);
>
> Damned off by one errors. Yes, it should be the product ID, not the
> vendor ID. These write u16's though, writing to wIndex 2 writes to
> bytes 4 and 5. the correct code is:
>
> write_eeprom(port, 2, 0);
> write_eeprom(port, eeprom_size - 2, checksum);
>
> And yes, the checksum code needs to be modified to create a specially
> crafted value that allows the existing checksum to pass.
Oh, I thought/assumed that the switch to VID and the real checksum was a
deliberate attempt at perversing the original code into something that
bricks even real FTDIs :-) (In which case all you'd need to add is the
two extra dummy writes, to load the proper data into the buffer register
on a real FT232RL to prevent it from corrupting the adjacent EEPROM words).
--
Hector Martin (hector@...cansoft.com)
Public Key: http://www.marcansoft.com/marcan.asc
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists