RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Scanners, Receivers and Related Equipment Forums > Radio Shack Scanners


Radio Shack Scanners - A forum for the discussion of all Radio Shack scanning radios and receivers.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 5:50 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricCottrell View Post
Hello,

So being locked out of the DMR upgrade is not disabling the scanner? This does not make sense from a marketing standpoint as the group locked out of the DMR upgrade are people that expressed an interest in receiving DMR. It appears Whistler is punishing them for ignoring their warnings on the website and daring to use unauthorized software.

73 Eric
The facts and timeline are being changed and emotions are running high. The radios in question are **legacy radios** from a failed company, RadioShack, with no hope of new support. I have it on good authority that Whistler all along intended to offer this upgrade, as they are now.

The part of the timeline many here want to gloss over is that two hackers choose to reverse engineer encryption methods and publish to the general public tools and URLs to a firmware repositary to allow non purchased firmware to be loaded onto these legacy radios, while the hackers are adamantly not accepting any responsibility and are stirring up a protest. If indeed the recent observations are correct, it seems Whistler removed the unauthorized DMR upgrade but left all other beneficial bug fixes and enhancements intact. I would not call that "disabled".

People who choose to ignore the warnings, mine included, may not be able to take advantage of the $60 upgrade but their **legacy radios** are still much better off.

Those who choose not to use the hacker tools to load unauthorized firmware to their radios are able to pay a very nominal fee to become fully current.

To me this is great support and otherwise a bunch of irrational complaints from those who took the risk. Enjoy your legacy radio with all the new bug fixes and capability! Maybe next time consider not supporting hacks, step back and consider that the person you praise is the reason you have a legacy radio that may not have DMR capability.

If we remove the purposeful reverse engineering and proud public release of tools and a firmware repository, everyone's radio would be able to upgraded! Seems like a simple cause and effect relationship to me if emotions are set aside.
Sponsored links
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 5:55 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cpunut View Post
The radios in question are **legacy radios** from a failed company, RadioShack,
And GRE.

But, good point about "unauthorized hacking". I wonder what the consumer protection laws say about hacked firmware "rights".
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 5:59 PM
JustLou's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NY/NJ
Posts: 469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NC1 View Post
I think the backlash is going to be severe on this one.

Hopefully Uniden can handle all the extra business soon to come their way. Not a single 668 owner is ever going to buy a Whistler product now, and will be sure to influence anyone they know not to buy one either.
I'm still not buying another Uniden scanner anytime soon after getting stuck with the hunk of junk Home Patrol 1. After countless promises from UPMan that they were working on fixing it, and an abandoned beta firmware test to work out the bugs, the only thing they released was the $100 "Extreme Upgrade", and a Home Patrol 2.
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 5:59 PM
muskrat39's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: north central Indiana
Posts: 1,192
Default

I would tend to call "locked" disabled. Unable to even bring the radios back to their original state.
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:00 PM
Member
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Diego County, California
Posts: 2,295
Arrow

Read this post & other posts in the thread. Post #1228
Thread #1228 Post: https://forums.radioreference.com/2788359-post1228.html
Thread: https://forums.radioreference.com/ra...rmware-62.html


Quote:
Originally Posted by mancow View Post
Nevermind. I finally found the thread that describes it.
Sponsored links
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:07 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tumegpc View Post
Whistler should have just exchanged them out for a true WS1080 and avoided all this mess. I'm not sending in my second 668 anytime soon.
Have you asked them this question?
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:10 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spitfire8520 View Post
I guess this means that Whistler's attempt to force users off of the "unauthorized" version of firmware to their official paid version has somewhat backfired since they do not have the ability to unlock your scanner once they disable it.



This is my impression given the comments floating around. This would mean a good number of users are now SOL both officially and unofficially once the kill switch kicks in.
Maybe a different way of looking at it is that loading firmware intended for a current radio into a legacy radio backfired?
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:14 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NC1 View Post
I think the backlash is going to be severe on this one.

Hopefully Uniden can handle all the extra business soon to come their way. Not a single 668 owner is ever going to buy a Whistler product now, and will be sure to influence anyone they know not to buy one either.

Had they supported the 668 owners with the DMR, they could have had a bright future. Funny thing here, they would not write software to upgrade the 668, but they wrote software to disable the unit should it have the ability.
That was just going out of their way to screw people. Hmmmmm, I would not do business at all with a company like that.
Completely backwards. They are offering an upgrade path. The hackers threw the wrench into the works for those unsuspecting enough to ignore the warnings.

What am I missing?
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:17 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
And GRE.

But, good point about "unauthorized hacking". I wonder what the consumer protection laws say about hacked firmware "rights".
Good point :-)
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:18 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muskrat39 View Post
I would tend to call "locked" disabled. Unable to even bring the radios back to their original state.
Did you miss the point that the mew "current state" is much improved?
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:22 PM
muskrat39's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: north central Indiana
Posts: 1,192
Default

No, I read if the radio is locked, it is unable to be repaired by Whistler. This is a radio that up til now, couldn't be bricked
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:26 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,007
Default

I took "locked" (in Whistler's terms) as meaning you could no longer upgrade the firmware. You were 'locked" into the currently loaded firmware. But, I could be wrong. All in all, an interesting case, as the hardware is not Whistler property, so is it legal to block upgrades that may never exist? This is close to the jailbreaking issue with Apple, and I believe the courts ruled jailbreaking was legal. It's the exact same concept.

Regardless, why can't Whistler just replace the CPU as RS/GRE did in the PRO-96?

I think where they "went wrong" is not in the locking of the features (if they did), but in the removal of the ability to upgrade the firmware.
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:26 PM
milcom_chaser's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 722
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tumegpc View Post
Whistler should have just exchanged them out for a true WS1080 and avoided all this mess. I'm not sending in my second 668 anytime soon.
Or make the 1088 keypad available for purchase as part of the upgrade...
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:27 PM
JustLou's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NY/NJ
Posts: 469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muskrat39 View Post
No, I read if the radio is locked, it is unable to be repaired by Whistler. This is a radio that up til now, couldn't be bricked
What is Whistler's definition of "locked"? I haven't heard anyone claim their radio was bricked.

Sent from my KFGIWI using Tapatalk
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:30 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cpunut View Post
Did you miss the point that the mew "current state" is much improved?
That iPad typing, "mew" vs "new".

I hear complaints that amount to "bricking my radio" whereas it seems Whistler only disabled the non paid for features but left all other improvements in place.

Where is the personal responsibility in most posts? I do see some on the prior and now this thread who get it.

Back to a technical subject, it seems to me that if someone wants the Whistler mail-in upgrade and their radio otherwise works, don't upgrade to DSP 3.1 and just keep using the radio or send it in. If you have loaded DSP 3.1, and the hacked DMR is still working, turn the radio off and remove the uSD card, format it and revert to DSP 3.0 or just send in the radio without the uSD card for the approved upgrade.
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:31 PM
Member
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, Ma
Posts: 2,125
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cpunut View Post
The facts and timeline are being changed and emotions are running high. The radios in question are **legacy radios** from a failed company, RadioShack, with no hope of new support. I have it on good authority that Whistler all along intended to offer this upgrade, as they are now.

The part of the timeline many here want to gloss over is that two hackers choose to reverse engineer encryption methods and publish to the general public tools and URLs to a firmware repositary to allow non purchased firmware to be loaded onto these legacy radios, while the hackers are adamantly not accepting any responsibility and are stirring up a protest. If indeed the recent observations are correct, it seems Whistler removed the unauthorized DMR upgrade but left all other beneficial bug fixes and enhancements intact. I would not call that "disabled".

People who choose to ignore the warnings, mine included, may not be able to take advantage of the $60 upgrade but their **legacy radios** are still much better off.

Those who choose not to use the hacker tools to load unauthorized firmware to their radios are able to pay a very nominal fee to become fully current.

To me this is great support and otherwise a bunch of irrational complaints from those who took the risk. Enjoy your legacy radio with all the new bug fixes and capability! Maybe next time consider not supporting hacks, step back and consider that the person you praise is the reason you have a legacy radio that may not have DMR capability.

If we remove the purposeful reverse engineering and proud public release of tools and a firmware repository, everyone's radio would be able to upgraded! Seems like a simple cause and effect relationship to me if emotions are set aside.
Hello,

You call it encryption, but the original method that GRE used, and Whistler inherited was obfuscation. Why do I call it obfuscation? Because that is what my research indicates it is. Companies have claimed simple XORing of data as encryption, but it has not been upheld in court. Just because some fixed XOR pattern is applied does not mean it is encryption. It is the same as people thinking transmitting P25 equals encrypted.

Whistler changed to true encryption. I did not provide the keys and code to handle it since that is illegal in the US. However, it is different outside of the US. Dealing with an file with the old obfuscation is different.

You lump me in with the other "bad hacker" from Russia. You have complained that people do not know you, but I could make the same complaint against you about me. I am not a 400 pound kid sitting in my bedroom in New Jersey or a Russian hacker. You seem to blame me for everything. Somehow all of this is my fault.

Somehow you think that exercising my Fair Use rights allows the Copyright Holder to employ any means necessary to deny my rights. Reverse Engineering is not a dirty word.
What is reverse engineering? definition and meaning - BusinessDictionary.com

73 Eric
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:32 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muskrat39 View Post
No, I read if the radio is locked, it is unable to be repaired by Whistler. This is a radio that up til now, couldn't be bricked
It's not bricked, actually left with more capability.
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:34 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
I took "locked" (in Whistler's terms) as meaning you could no longer upgrade the firmware. You were 'locked" into the currently loaded firmware. But, I could be wrong. All in all, an interesting case, as the hardware is not Whistler property, so is it legal to block upgrades that may never exist? This is close to the jailbreaking issue with Apple, and I believe the courts ruled jailbreaking was legal. It's the exact same concept.

Regardless, why can't Whistler just replace the CPU as RS/GRE did in the PRO-96?

I think where they "went wrong" is not in the locking of the features (if they did), but in the removal of the ability to upgrade the firmware.
The Pro-96 was a board swap. Maybe, for a cost they may consider if someone asks but it probably won't be for $60.
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:42 PM
cpunut's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricCottrell View Post
Hello,

You call it encryption, but the original method that GRE used, and Whistler inherited was obfuscation. Why do I call it obfuscation? Because that is what my research indicates it is. Companies have claimed simple XORing of data as encryption, but it has not been upheld in court. Just because some fixed XOR pattern is applied does not mean it is encryption. It is the same as people thinking transmitting P25 equals encrypted.

Whistler changed to true encryption. I did not provide the keys and code to handle it since that is illegal in the US. However, it is different outside of the US. Dealing with an file with the old obfuscation is different.

You lump me in with the other "bad hacker" from Russia. You have complained that people do not know you, but I could make the same complaint against you about me. I am not a 400 pound kid sitting in my bedroom in New Jersey or a Russian hacker. You seem to blame me for everything. Somehow all of this is my fault.

Somehow you think that exercising my Fair Use rights allows the Copyright Holder to employ any means necessary to deny my rights. Reverse Engineering is not a dirty word.
What is reverse engineering? definition and meaning - BusinessDictionary.com

73 Eric
Eric,

I sent you two PM's which have no reply to try to bring some respectful common ground to this in a non public form. Yes you are a huge part of the problem which would not exist without your efforts, and not just to be personally satisfied with your accomplishment but, to make tools and post for all.

That said, I have always complemented your talent and know you are not the kid in the bedroom, never even implied that.

Did you see that I reached out in a professional manner via PM, explaining more about the deeper concern? Quite frankly part of my motivation was to facilitate an introduction to Whistler which might be beneficial to both in some way.
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:43 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cpunut View Post
The Pro-96 was a board swap. Maybe, for a cost they may consider if someone asks but it probably won't be for $60.
I heard it was a CPU swap, but either way the same method should work.
Closed Thread

Tags
trojan malicious code, whistler scanner

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2015 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions