Reply by Torgeir Veimo ●June 11, 20042004-06-11
On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 22:54 +0100, Torgeir Veimo wrote:
> If the security mode is not engaged, the
> > STRA/AS pin will act as the address strobe output, which can easily
> be
> > recognized on an oscilloscope.
>
> Like this?
>
> http://nothome.com/68hc711e9.jpg

It doesn't appear to be a secured device. I get this readout from pin 4:

http://nothome.com/secretdevice.jpg

--
-Tor

Reply by Torgeir Veimo ●June 11, 20042004-06-11
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 12:00 +0300, Tony Papadimitriou wrote:
> The HC11 Reference Manual provides a method for checking security without
> disabling it (and, therefore, clearing EEPROM). Here's the relevant excerpt
> from the Manual.
>
> "The presence of the security option can be detected while the MCU is in
> reset by forcing the mode A (MODA) and mode B (MODB) pins to 1 and
> monitoring the strobe A/address strobe (STRA/AS) pin. When MODA
> and MODB are 1s, the normal expanded mode is requested. If security
> is engaged, the STRA/AS pin will act as a high-impedance input
> because the security option causes the MODA pin to be interpreted as a
> 0 even if it is a 1. In single-chip modes, the STRA/AS pin is configured
> for the strobe A input function. If the security mode is not engaged, the
> STRA/AS pin will act as the address strobe output, which can easily be
> recognized on an oscilloscope.

Like this?

http://nothome.com/68hc711e9.jpg

> This checking procedure allows the
> security mode to be detected without disengaging it. If the MODB pin
> were low in this experiment, the bootstrap mode would be requested
> rather than the normal single-chip mode. In the case of MODB low, care
> is required not to release reset because doing so would cause the
> security option to be disengaged."
>
> You'll most likely need to prepare a custom circuit to try this.

Am I right in understanding this in that as long as both MODA and MODB
are kept high, there is not danger of disengaging the security mode, it
is only possible if MODB is kept low?

This is from my standard 711e9 mc on my evaluation board. Will try the
possible secured device next..

--
-Torgeir


Reply by Tony Papadimitriou ●May 4, 20042004-05-04
----- Original Message -----
From: "Torgeir Veimo" <>
To: < > On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 22:29 +0100, Torgeir Veimo wrote:
> > On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 20:20 +0000, Mark Schultz wrote:
> > > --- In , Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@p...> wrote:

> > > If, as Tony noted, the device does NOT have a 'S' or 'SEC' in its
> > > part number, the device in question will IGNORE the setting of the
> > > NOSEC bit in the config register.
> >
> > It's labeled mc68hc711e9cfn2 from my earlier notes. Some more letters
> > seems to be 5C47M SS019947.
> >
> > I can verify one more time to be shure though..
>
> The labels are MC68HC711E9CFN2 5C47M SSDJ9947.
>
> Can the SSDJ indicate a secured device? Nothing matches that string on
> google. The 5C47M indicates the mask of the chip? What exactly does the
> mask number imply?

The SSDJ9447 is not the part number (the first line is the part number), the
9447 indicates date of manufacture: 47th week of 1994 and the SSDJ must mean
the production line and/or fabrication facilities.

> Torgeir Veimo <>


Reply by Bob Smith ●May 4, 20042004-05-04
Please obtain a copy of the M68HC11 E Series Technical Data manual for the
HC11 E family of devices.

Then please refer to Appendix B, "Mechanical Data and Ordering Invormation"
and, in particular Table B-1, "Standard Device Ordering Information".

There you will find that the Part Number for "OTPROM, Ednhanced Security
Feature" devices is "MC68S711E9CFN[2 | 3]".

See also in that data manual, Section 4.2.2.1, CONFIG Register" for a
description of the NOSEC (Security Disable) bit and Section 4.4.2, "EEPROM
Security" for additional information.

As I understand it, the security feature is only available as a MASK ROM
option (meaning permanent) bit on MASK ROM devices or on the specific OTP
device mentioned above.

Now as to your specific questions:

>
> The labels are MC68HC711E9CFN2 5C47M SSDJ9947.
>
> Can the SSDJ indicate a secured device?

I doubt it very much. Typically that indicates the production facility and
the date code (1999, Week 47).

> Nothing matches that string on google.

Not surprising.

> The 5C47M indicates the mask of the chip?

Yes, the HC711E9 had a long run using the 5C47M silicon mask.

What exactly does the mask number imply?

It is an unique number assigned to each variation of the silicon etching
masks used to fabricate the part.

>

Best wishes, Bob Smith --- Avoid computer viruses, Practice safe hex ---

-- Specializing in small, cost effective
embedded control systems --

http://www.smithmachineworks.com/embedprod.html Robert L. (Bob) Smith
Smith Machine Works, Inc.
9900 Lumlay Road
Richmond, VA 23236 804/745-2608
----- Original Message -----
From: "Torgeir Veimo" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: [m68HC11] Re: 68hc711e9 security feature > On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 22:29 +0100, Torgeir Veimo wrote:
> > On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 20:20 +0000, Mark Schultz wrote:
> > > --- In , Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@p...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thank you for the reply. If its not a secure device, I assume
> > > > putting it into non-user mode will not change it's EEPROM
> > content?
> > >
> > > If, as Tony noted, the device does NOT have a 'S' or 'SEC' in its
> > > part number, the device in question will IGNORE the setting of the
> > > NOSEC bit in the config register.
> >
> > It's labeled mc68hc711e9cfn2 from my earlier notes. Some more letters
> > seems to be 5C47M SS019947.
> >
> > I can verify one more time to be shure though..
>
> The labels are MC68HC711E9CFN2 5C47M SSDJ9947.
>
> Can the SSDJ indicate a secured device? Nothing matches that string on
> google. The 5C47M indicates the mask of the chip? What exactly does the
> mask number imply?
>
> I will check again with a custom circuit and a scope as suggested
> previously in the next weeks before I plunge into interfacing the
> microcontroller. >
>
> --
> Torgeir Veimo < >
> --
------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To

Reply by Torgeir Veimo ●May 4, 20042004-05-04
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 22:29 +0100, Torgeir Veimo wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 20:20 +0000, Mark Schultz wrote:
> > --- In , Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@p...> wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you for the reply. If its not a secure device, I assume
> > > putting it into non-user mode will not change it's EEPROM
> content?
> >
> > If, as Tony noted, the device does NOT have a 'S' or 'SEC' in its
> > part number, the device in question will IGNORE the setting of the
> > NOSEC bit in the config register.
>
> It's labeled mc68hc711e9cfn2 from my earlier notes. Some more letters
> seems to be 5C47M SS019947.
>
> I can verify one more time to be shure though..

The labels are MC68HC711E9CFN2 5C47M SSDJ9947.

Can the SSDJ indicate a secured device? Nothing matches that string on
google. The 5C47M indicates the mask of the chip? What exactly does the
mask number imply?

I will check again with a custom circuit and a scope as suggested
previously in the next weeks before I plunge into interfacing the
microcontroller.

--
Torgeir Veimo <

Reply by Darrell N. ●April 30, 20042004-04-30
I have some secure HC11's, I believe they are marked:

68S711E9CFN2

Even though other flavors of HC11 have a "NOSEC" bit, unless it
is an "S" part, it cannot be secured.

> On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 22:29 +0100, Torgeir Veimo wrote:
> I would assume it would be an MC68HC711E9CFS2 if it had the
> security feature..


Regards,
Darrell Norquay

Datalog Technology Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Voice: (403) 243-2220 Fax: (403) 243-2872
Email: Web: www.datalog.ab.ca

Reply by Bob Smith ●April 30, 20042004-04-30
A "CFS" chip is a windowed, ceramic part and will usually have a XC prefix.

Bob

--- Avoid computer viruses, Practice safe hex ---

-- Specializing in small, cost effective
embedded control systems --

http://www.smithmachineworks.com/embedprod.html Robert L. (Bob) Smith
Smith Machine Works, Inc.
9900 Lumlay Road
Richmond, VA 23236 804/745-2608
----- Original Message -----
From: "Torgeir Veimo" <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 5:44 PM
Subject: Re: [m68HC11] Re: 68hc711e9 security feature > On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 22:29 +0100, Torgeir Veimo wrote:
> > On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 20:20 +0000, Mark Schultz wrote:
> > > --- In , Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@p...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thank you for the reply. If its not a secure device, I assume
> > > > putting it into non-user mode will not change it's EEPROM
> > content?
> > >
> > > If, as Tony noted, the device does NOT have a 'S' or 'SEC' in its
> > > part number, the device in question will IGNORE the setting of the
> > > NOSEC bit in the config register.
> >
> > It's labeled mc68hc711e9cfn2 from my earlier notes. Some more letters
> > seems to be 5C47M SS019947.
>
> I would assume it would be an MC68HC711E9CFS2 if it had the security
> feature..
>
> --
> Torgeir >
> --
------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To

Reply by Torgeir Veimo ●April 30, 20042004-04-30
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 22:29 +0100, Torgeir Veimo wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 20:20 +0000, Mark Schultz wrote:
> > --- In , Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@p...> wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you for the reply. If its not a secure device, I assume
> > > putting it into non-user mode will not change it's EEPROM
> content?
> >
> > If, as Tony noted, the device does NOT have a 'S' or 'SEC' in its
> > part number, the device in question will IGNORE the setting of the
> > NOSEC bit in the config register.
>
> It's labeled mc68hc711e9cfn2 from my earlier notes. Some more letters
> seems to be 5C47M SS019947.

I would assume it would be an MC68HC711E9CFS2 if it had the security
feature..

--
Torgeir


Reply by Torgeir Veimo ●April 30, 20042004-04-30
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 20:20 +0000, Mark Schultz wrote:
> --- In , Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@p...> wrote:
>
> > Thank you for the reply. If its not a secure device, I assume
> > putting it into non-user mode will not change it's EEPROM content?
>
> If, as Tony noted, the device does NOT have a 'S' or 'SEC' in its
> part number, the device in question will IGNORE the setting of the
> NOSEC bit in the config register.

It's labeled mc68hc711e9cfn2 from my earlier notes. Some more letters
seems to be 5C47M SS019947.

I can verify one more time to be shure though..

--
Torgeir Veimo <


Reply by Mark Schultz ●April 30, 20042004-04-30
--- In , Torgeir Veimo <torgeir@p...> wrote:

> Thank you for the reply. If its not a secure device, I assume
> putting it into non-user mode will not change it's EEPROM content?

If, as Tony noted, the device does NOT have a 'S' or 'SEC' in its
part number, the device in question will IGNORE the setting of the
NOSEC bit in the config register. You will be able to read out the
ROM contents, as well as EEPROM contents, IF you can get the device
into a suitable platform that will let you utilize the 'bootstrap'
mode. If you do not have such a board handy, the HC11 reference
manual provides a schematic for a 'minimal' HC11 setup that you
could build that would allow you to get the device into 'bootstrap'
mode and (with suitable tools, such as JBug11) read out the device
contents.

If the device in question is a 'S' or 'SEC' type device, attempting
to place the device in one of the test modes will, at a minimum,
erase the EEPROM contents, which will likely make the firmware on
the device non-functional. On some (typically newer) HC11 secured
devices, the device will prohibit entry into the test modes
altogether (at least from the user's perspective) in addition to
erasing the EEPROM contents.