Making our own standalone firmware update

[gary123]

Good point. It was a wish list but I am in agreement any functionality should remain in line with current features and capabilities.

I should have thought through all the implications of what I was saying. This is exactly why the thread is public. it keeps everyone's feet on the ground.

 

[werinshades]

This is starting to sound more like a pipe dream as posts increase. But...I'll hope for the best. Stop posting, get to work I say!

 

[gary123]

werinshades.

you are right. Talk is cheap. results count. We do not want to fall into the same hole the "let us help you thread' did.

We need to expand the team from the four members we have to about ten. in the earlier post I itemized some of the skill sets required. Thanks to GTR8000 excellent post and wakeup call we also could use someone with a legal background. We are not hiring a lawyer we are nowhere near that point. However someone who can point out to them obvious issues or mistakes is going to be essential.

 

[MStep]

I know the guys are busy at work. but my suggestion is to leave"Uni" in the name, hence Project Unicorn. And when I see an SDS100 or SDS200 boot up with a Unicorn logo on the initial splash screen, we will all know that something has happened and that the project has officially launched.

But right now Imma gonna do project "lunch".

 

[werinshades]

I know the guys are busy at work. but my suggestion is to leave"Uni" in the name, hence Project Unicorn. And when I see an SDS100 or SDS200 boot up with a Unicorn logo on the initial splash screen, we will all know that something has happened and that the project has officially launched.

But right now Imma gonna do project "lunch".

Well...Unicorn has another meaning that probably doesn't apply here

 

[tumegpc]

Well...Unicorn has another meaning that probably doesn't apply here

Project Gitgo? meaning -from the beginning

 

[N8LHG]

I think it was once posted by Paul that you own the scanner Uniden owns the software and firmware.

I have heard that as well. I also suspect that someone who was a good coder, that had the firmware code, not only could they bypass the "paid options" scheme, but could probably program the digital radio encryption decoding as well. I love the idea of having a public version of this software, but I don't think there is any chance what-so-ever of it happening unless its deep underground and covert and illegal .

 

[Outerdog]

Stop posting, get to work I say!

Ah, the age old cry of crowd who isn't doing any of the actual work. It can be heard by the ranks of every f/oss project and volunteer effort in existence.

 

[slicerwizard]

but could probably program the digital radio encryption decoding as well

I suspect that this is one of the primary goals of this project. And there's nothing illegal about that specific functionality.

 

[fantasma25]

Personally, it sounds like a great project!! Unfortunately, it also sounds like you are hoping(more like expecting) Uniden to jump onboard with this project, and this I believe, has a very low chance of happening. Maybe Joe Bearcart can make room in his department to bring you onboard and maybe then some of the items on his "list" can start becoming a reality.

 

[fantasma25]

Good point. It was a wish list but I am in agreement any functionality should remain in line with current features and capabilities.

I should have thought through all the implications of what I was saying. This is exactly why the thread is public. it keeps everyone's feet on the ground.

I think many things should have been thought through prior to this post even getting started...just my 2 cents.

 

[MStep]

Uniden has not been able to get a firmware upgrade out there in a VERY long time. If Gary and his guys are going to do anything, as they have pointed out several times, they are likely going to have to work from scratch. My opinion is that Uniden now considers further development of x36 (save for hardware changes) and SDS units as unnecessary and not worth the time or effort. They will keep pushing out units until they run out of parts or until they introduce new models sometime in the future. From my viewpoint, everything changed after Paul's untimely demise. It's not really that the program changed direction, but more that it lost direction.

These are becoming somewhat circular discussions. Uniden, Joe Bearcat, Gary----- as the saying rather crudely goes, "It's time for someone, somewhere and somehow to either sh*t, or get off the pot".

 

[gary123]

Ok the door is open we need 6 more people to get a good foundation on getting this off the ground. Either step up here or by PM.

Oh and slicerwizard. I and a few others I know respect you and the knowledge and experience you have. I invite you to assist us. If your not interested that is fine as well. You can always change your mind and be welcome . Until then please do not stir the pot with inflammatory suggestions about encryption. We are 1000% behind RR, Unidens and almost every other supplier of hardware and software's position on this. Bluntly and clearly we are not going to entertain the notion. I am not trying to pick a fight but I am going to keep the thread focused and not go down blind alleys. ok?

 

[radio3353]

I think it was once posted by Paul that you own the scanner Uniden owns the software and firmware.

Exactly. Just like music and books. You don't own the content when you buy music or books (they are copyrighted.) You just own a license to use the content for your personal use.

 

[ur20v]

I also suspect that someone who was a good coder, that had the firmware code, not only could they bypass the "paid options" scheme, but could probably program the digital radio encryption decoding as well.

Riiiiiight... an option to select the appropriate encryption standard and then enter the correct encryption key? That would be useful to who, exactly? I don't even think most of the guys who run the systems have access to the actual keys, and it's also likely that those same guys have access to "spare" or surplus radios for the systems they run that they've programmed for rx only... just a guess.

Or if you're thinking there's some easy way of just "decoding" encrypted traffic that Uniden refuses to include in their scanners, you really don't have a clue how encryption works.

 

[polkaroo]

SDS is effectively abandonware. I'd say Paul was the only person doing or leading any development. Hardware design was flawed from the gate, there's really only so much you can do to fix with software.

Tbh, you'd probably have better luck reverse engineering to gut a scanner and reuse the display and keypad modules (SPI/I2C/LVDS and GPIO?) to interface with a Raspberry Pi or x86 board and SDR stick to run OP25 or whatever. I can't see the hardware of an SDS having anywhere near the power of those SBCs. Otherwise you're boxing yourself in with the limitations of the CPU and hardware design even if you knew all about the internals.

Firmware aside, think about the flawed hardware in the SDS200:
- A mobile scanner that can't survive an engine crank from a modern vehicle designed to start/stop cycle.
- Selector knob on the left side so when installed in a vehicle, your hand covers the screen when scrolling. Did they not learn from the 536? Have they not seen any commercial radios?
- Poor front end filtering especially VHF - stuff gets wiped out with strong adjacent signals.
- (Software) Only writes updates to SD card on power-off (eventually, hard power cycles from engine start/stop will corrupt the SD card)

 

[Firebuff66]

Riiiiiight... an option to select the appropriate encryption standard and then enter the correct encryption key?

Unication pagers do it very well, I have AES & ADP on P25 channels on my G5 and it works like a charm. No reason Uniden couldn't do it if they wanted to

 

[slicerwizard]

Riiiiiight... an option to select the appropriate encryption standard and then enter the correct encryption key? That would be useful to who, exactly?

To anyone who has access to the key.

I don't even think most of the guys who run the systems have access to the actual keys, and it's also likely that those same guys have access to "spare" or surplus radios for the systems they run that they've programmed for rx only... just a guess.

There's more out there than just public safety systems. Commercial operators also deploy encryption. Having a FPP receiver that can handle whatever secret squirrel you're deploying would be quite handy. IIRC, this is something that's in the OP25 pipeline, but obviously, a small form factor scanner would be far more convenient. Dunno why gary's getting all worked up over it, but if he and his team don't want to go there, that's their business.

Or if you're thinking there's some easy way of just "decoding" encrypted traffic that Uniden refuses to include in their scanners, you really don't have a clue how encryption works.

Strawman.

 

[N8LHG]

Riiiiiight... an option to select the appropriate encryption standard and then enter the correct encryption key? That would be useful to who, exactly? I don't even think most of the guys who run the systems have access to the actual keys, and it's also likely that those same guys have access to "spare" or surplus radios for the systems they run that they've programmed for rx only... just a guess.

Or if you're thinking there's some easy way of just "decoding" encrypted traffic that Uniden refuses to include in their scanners, you really don't have a clue how encryption works.

Uh... No, I'm not thinking that at all. I'm amazed at how many "small talk" messages go on these forms where people just go ballistic over nothing more than an "interesting conversation". I always considered these fourms as conversations that are interesting and fun discussions. As a retired IT engineer, I worked side by side with all kinds of professional individuals including pen testers or "ethical hackers", and yeah, you would be surprised how easy the encryption could be penetrated by someone with a little imagination and the right skills. So as a professional engineer who worked in the industry for well over 50 years, I think I have a "clue" about what I was stating. But let it be know, my interest here is no more than a fascinating conversation.

 

[ur20v]

Uh... No, I'm not thinking that at all. I'm amazed at how many "small talk" messages go on these forms where people just go ballistic over nothing more than an "interesting conversation". I always considered these fourms as conversations that are interesting and fun discussions. As a retired IT engineer, I worked side by side with all kinds of professional individuals including pen testers or "ethical hackers", and yeah, you would be surprised how easy the encryption could be penetrated by someone with a little imagination and the right skills. So as a professional engineer who worked in the industry for well over 50 years, I think I have a "clue" about what I was stating. But let it be know, my interest here is no more than a fascinating conversation.

Who's going ballistic? I always have fun reading what ignorant dolts post about encryption and especially get a chuckle out of the ones who think it's something that is easily defeated but the scanner manufacturers refuse to implement that feature.

The only successful attempts at "penetrating" modern advanced encryption have come from situations where the parties involved had physical access to the encrypted device in question and were able to exploit flaws in the said device, or where investigators found the key written down near or even on the device itself. In neither of those types of situations is the encryption itself compromised. So whether it be a single person with "a little imagination and the right skills" or a whole roomful of Sheldon Coopers, none of them are going to crack AES-128 (never mind AES-256).