Flash erase time

In article <lsi18s$ghe$1@dont-email.me>,
Dimiter_Popoff  <dp@tgi-sci.com> wrote:
}The part was an Atmel at49bv163d 
..
}So my question is how likely is it for a flash chip like that
}to wear off after 2-3 times initial programming?

The data sheet says "Minimum 100,000 Erase Cycles", so extremely unlikely.

On 15.8.2014 г. 01:03, Don Y wrote:
> Hi Dimiter,
>
> On 8/14/2014 2:58 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>> I had to replace a flash chip yesterday because it would
>> not read OK at times - and had a byte fail after programming
>> about all the 2M of it.
>> Since I don't do large volumes this is my first ever experience
>> of the kind and I want to ask the group for some insight.
>>
>> The part was an Atmel at49bv163d ; it was on a netmca board
>> which came for repair (torn power cable...) after a few years
>> at the customer.
>> After replacing it (with an equivalent) things went back to normal.
>
> Presumably NOR flash for program storage (i.e., XIP)?
>
>> The device had been opened and tampered with. I think even the flash
>> may have been unsoldered and resoldered but it has been done
>> reasonably clean so I can't say that for sure. [Reverse engineering
>> the netMCA could be considered only by someone uncapable of
>> understanding how hopeless the task is, so needing to unsolder
>> the flash rather than JTAG reading it via the CPU as we do it
>> here and pose no obstacles to might have been opted for....].
>
> Given our past discussions in this regard, I'd be willing to bet
> this is *exactly* what happened!  And, that the adversary didn't
> really care to "understand" the design; rather, to be able to
> *duplicate* it (counterfeit).
>
> This is actually pretty common  :<  Sure, the thief can't "support"
> the product to the extent that they could make "upgrades".  But, for
> an "as is" product, their development costs are *zip*!
>
>> So my question is how likely is it for a flash chip like that
>> to wear off after 2-3 times initial programming? Yesterday I
>> did rewrite it may be 10 times but it showed the symptoms from
>> the very start.
>>
>> My curiosity is directed towards the flash durability and perhaps
>> towards what has been done to the device.
>
> I'd guess they tried to access it in some more "conventional"
> reader/programmer (e.g., as a "ROM") and screwed the pooch in the
> process.

Hi Don,

this might be the case though the people I have been in contact
with did not look to be heading that way. Then if someone would
need to unsolder the flash in order to read it his chances to get
the cloning right are virtually 0 (here is the board:
http://tgi-sci.com/misc/nmc3top.gif ).

Then cloning it would do them little good, I have taken precautions
against what a number of players already attempted - to write
some baloney PC software and interface it to the device which
does the job (and has all the software one needs accessible
from any RFB/VNC capable platform). Then they "sell" the "system"
at 20k euro instead of my 2k .

But there is no control interface to the netmca other than
through its "screen" via VNC; I know these people did contemplate
writing something to click on screen buttons which supports
your theory. If this is the case they may have wanted to clone
the device rather than buy it so they would not depend on me.
Now after two years of trying they may have given up the
independence - or perhaps succeeded with me being unaware of that.

Either way this is unlikely to ever work, with all the
movable/stretchable windows on the netmca display, live
spectra, scope display etc.

Which is not to say they can't sell a system at 20k, for that
it does not have to work - it only has to look as if it works
so the entire chain involved in the "deal" gets paid.

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff, TGI             http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/sets/72157600228621276/

Hi Dimiter,

On 8/15/2014 2:46 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:

> this might be the case though the people I have been in contact
> with did not look to be heading that way. Then if someone would
> need to unsolder the flash in order to read it his chances to get
> the cloning right are virtually 0 (here is the board:
> http://tgi-sci.com/misc/nmc3top.gif ).
>
> Then cloning it would do them little good, I have taken precautions
> against what a number of players already attempted - to write
> some baloney PC software and interface it to the device which
> does the job (and has all the software one needs accessible
> from any RFB/VNC capable platform). Then they "sell" the "system"
> at 20k euro instead of my 2k .

But, could they just *copy* the board, the firmware AND the PC
software?  I.e., become an "unlicensed manufacturer and distributor"
of your product?  ILLEGALLY??

Or, make some token changes to the design (cosmetic) and/or firmware
and software to *suggest* it isn't the same (which anyone other than
a cretin would recognize as a thin disguise)?

E.g., in the 80's, video (arcade) games were blatantly copied.
Almost literally!  A tiny bit of effort would be expended to,
for example, change the name of the game ("Frogger" might become
"Logger" or "Froggie").  Or, tweek the copyright notice (again,
illegal but done, nonetheless).

The counterfeiters goal wasn't to be a long term presence in the
market.  Rather, to quickly steal some sales (as their development
costs were essentially ZERO) and move on -- to the next "garage"
down the street.

I.e., *your* thieves may not be interested in support contracts or
any ongoing business with "their" customers -- they'll let YOU
handle supporting THEIR sales!  Especially as they have no real
knowledge of the workings of the product to be able to make any
changes/improvements/repairs/fixes!

> But there is no control interface to the netmca other than
> through its "screen" via VNC; I know these people did contemplate
> writing something to click on screen buttons which supports
> your theory. If this is the case they may have wanted to clone
> the device rather than buy it so they would not depend on me.
> Now after two years of trying they may have given up the
> independence - or perhaps succeeded with me being unaware of that.
>
> Either way this is unlikely to ever work, with all the
> movable/stretchable windows on the netmca display, live
> spectra, scope display etc.

Again, imagine I walked into one of YOUR (legitimate) customer's
premises and STOLE his genuine netMCA.  Now, imagine the device
that I stole was an exact copy of your device.  What would the
practical difference(s) be (to the thief)?

I.e., what prevents YOUR software from running on MY PC (instead of
the PC that belongs to your legitimate customer -- from whom I
stole the device and software)?  What prevents me from duplicating
the actual device hardware, etc.  (yes, I know there is considerable
know-how/art in some of the manufacture -- coils, etc. -- but, can
everything else be replicated by a conventional electronics
manufacturer?)

E.g., to protect video games, full custom chips were often designed
("potting" subassemblies was far too easy to work-around -- even
if you embedded metal fibers, etc. to confuse XRay's).  The
chips were sold as spare parts from the regular parts depot -- for
$2000 (essentially, the price of a new game!)  I think they would
give you a $1950 credit if you returned the OLD chip with no signs
of tampering  :>

> Which is not to say they can't sell a system at 20k, for that
> it does not have to work - it only has to look as if it works
> so the entire chain involved in the "deal" gets paid.

<frown>  Eventually, a "customer" is going to need support and
feel screwed.  Hopefully, they realize they have been screwed
by the counterfeiter and not *you*!  Ideally, you can have a list
of "registered owners" or some other credential so you can deprive
customers of thieves any support and dry up the market that way!

--

BTW, yesterday's $0 "rescue":

<http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/products/pedge/en/dell-kmm-rack-console-spec-en.pdf>

I'm going to install it in my equipment closet so I can access the
servers IF NEED BE without having to put a desk, monitor, keyboard,
etc. in there!  Slide it out when needed; do my work; then slide it
back in so its out of the way, when done!

Hope you are well.  Regards to L.

On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:50:48 -0700, Don Y wrote:

> Hi Dimiter,
> 
> On 8/15/2014 2:46 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> 
>> this might be the case though the people I have been in contact with
>> did not look to be heading that way. Then if someone would need to
>> unsolder the flash in order to read it his chances to get the cloning
>> right are virtually 0 (here is the board:
>> http://tgi-sci.com/misc/nmc3top.gif ).
>>
>> Then cloning it would do them little good, I have taken precautions
>> against what a number of players already attempted - to write some
>> baloney PC software and interface it to the device which does the job
>> (and has all the software one needs accessible from any RFB/VNC capable
>> platform). Then they "sell" the "system" at 20k euro instead of my 2k .
> 
> But, could they just *copy* the board, the firmware AND the PC software?
>  I.e., become an "unlicensed manufacturer and distributor"
> of your product?  ILLEGALLY??

I'm not sure what you mean by "illegally" in your comments.  If you mean 
"can go to jail for doing", then no, it's not illegal to steal IP, at 
least not in any jurisdiction that I know of.

If you mean "leave yourself open to being sued", then yes, in most 
"Western" countries this applies -- but the owner of the IP won't be 
getting any help from the cops.  It's considered a civil matter between 
the IP owner and the IP thief.  Having copyright or a patent gives you an 
entry into a courtroom, but paying for the courtroom appearance, and your 
half of the lawyers therein, is up to you.

Then if you take yourself outside of a "Western" country, and you'll find 
that the views on intellectual property are quite different.  The whole 
notion of patents and copyrights and whatnot is something that evolved in 
Europe fairly recently (just a few hundred years ago).  It is (a) still 
evolving here, and (b) hasn't really spread outside of heavily 
Europeanized countries.

I have no idea of what the situation is is the former eastern block 
countries, but I'm pretty sure that Marxism rejected the concept of 
intellectual property along with other sorts of property ownership, and so 
stunted or reversed the progress of IP law.  While I'm sure that it varies 
greatly from country to country, I suspect that the level interest by 
officialdom is much less, and that the ability of an ordinary Joe to seize 
a court is for a lawsuit is much less.

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Hi Tim,

On 8/15/2014 12:18 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:

>>> Then cloning it would do them little good, I have taken precautions
>>> against what a number of players already attempted - to write some
>>> baloney PC software and interface it to the device which does the job
>>> (and has all the software one needs accessible from any RFB/VNC capable
>>> platform). Then they "sell" the "system" at 20k euro instead of my 2k .
>>
>> But, could they just *copy* the board, the firmware AND the PC software?
>>   I.e., become an "unlicensed manufacturer and distributor"
>> of your product?  ILLEGALLY??
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "illegally" in your comments.  If you mean
> "can go to jail for doing", then no, it's not illegal to steal IP, at
> least not in any jurisdiction that I know of.

I meant it as "without your consent".

Hence my original comment about moving on "to the next garage".
E.g., Samsung can't blatantly ignore the ruling in the judgement
re: Apple -- because Samsung can't "pack up and move down the
street" ... reopening as Bamsung!

In the video game heyday, this was not the case.  A small shop could
clone a game, sell many copies, then "disappear" and reemerge as a
different LEGAL ENTITY before the victim was able to get an injunction
against importing their products.

Given that many "owner/operators" (i.e., the folks who purchased the
games) were a bit "grey" in their ethics (so to speak), this meant
the market for counterfeits never changed -- nor the supply -- as
a result of any real or perceived impropriety with these "sources".

Dimiter is a one-man shop, essentially.  The legal system is effectively
useless to him -- it costs more to defend against challenges to his
IP than the total sales are possibly worth!  Not to mention the time
it takes away from making and supporting legitimate sales and new
product!

His remedies are similar to the gaming vendors:  raise the bar to
make counterfeiting harder/more expensive (i.e., to approach the
cost of a genuine development effort); penalize customers of those
counterfeiters so they regret their purchase and HOPE word gets
around that this would be a bad way to go for other potential
customers.

[Anyone who has gone the "protection" route realizes its not a long
term solution to protecting your market -- all schemes fail over
time!]

A large, very "ethical" US manufacturer once blatantly copied the
control software (ran in a PLC) for a product that they bought from
a company I worked for.  And, proceeded to modify it and develop their
own "internal" product cutting us out of the $$$ loop entirely.  Do
you sue them because they have "allegedly" developed a product just
like yours FOR THEIR OWN INTERNAL CONSUMPTION?  (buying all the
COTS parts from the same vendors that YOU bought them from)  Or, do
you make a note of it and keep it in mind for your future products
AS YOU CONTINUE TRYING TO SELL TO THEM?

On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:32:34 -0700, Don Y wrote:

> [Anyone who has gone the "protection" route realizes its not a long term
> solution to protecting your market -- all schemes fail over time!]

What Dimiter can do -- and probably does, already -- is to continually 
improve his product so that people want to buy his latest, instead of 
hanging on to his older stuff, or counterfeits thereof.

He's fortunate that he's selling scientific instruments.  In most such 
markets that I know of, you're selling to people who need the instrument 
to work, and whose time is valuable enough that it's just not a winning 
proposition to buy junk and dick with it.

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

On 8/15/2014 4:20 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:32:34 -0700, Don Y wrote:
>
>> [Anyone who has gone the "protection" route realizes its not a long term
>> solution to protecting your market -- all schemes fail over time!]
>
> What Dimiter can do -- and probably does, already -- is to continually
> improve his product so that people want to buy his latest, instead of
> hanging on to his older stuff, or counterfeits thereof.

I understand it to be a relatively small market.  And, lots of
"politics" in his customer base that effectively make it hard
to make inroads.

Note that improvements that are "just" firmware/software upgrades
are easy to counterfeit after-the-fact... buy a counterfeit
device, then buy a counterfeit "upgrade".

E.g., in the video game market, it was *cheaper* to buy upgrades
from the grey vendors.  You would slap new "artwork" on the
generic cabinet that you had purchased (at a reduced price);
then, upgrade the ROMs on the counterfeit board set (that you
also bought at a reduced price).

Going directly to the original game vendor, you would end up
with a brand new cabinet, brand new boards, brand new firmware,
etc.

At $2K/game, an owner/operator has to pull in at least $4K in
"play" (25c at a time) to pay off the initial cost of the game
(because you typically split the take with the "location" that
is hosting your machine.  (ignore costs of repairs which come
"off the top").

As many of these locations are low traffic (bowling alleys,
private fraternal clubs, etc.) it can take a fair bit of time
to generate that much play.  And, there is an upper limit on
the time a piece is playable -- many games were "90 day
wonders" (consumers lost interest in them within 90 days of
their release).

For a "genuine" game, you are then left with large devices that
need to be stored somewhere (scrapped!).  Hence the appeal of
a reusable, grey market approach (remember, they don't have
engineering/development staffs that they have to pay!  Royalties
to other tie-ins -- e.g., licensing a name/concept from a movie
or entertainment venue, etc.)

> He's fortunate that he's selling scientific instruments.  In most such
> markets that I know of, you're selling to people who need the instrument
> to work, and whose time is valuable enough that it's just not a winning
> proposition to buy junk and dick with it.

See above re: business politics.

Note that these places also tend not to replace equipment often
(from Dimiter's offline comments).  So, he makes a big investment
and *hopes* he can recover it from legitimate buyers while dealing
with losses to competitors (apparently, they buy his products
to see what's inside -- and, may even have the audacity to RETURN
said devices for refunds once they've learned what they want to!)
and counterfeiters.

Tough nut to crack!

On 15.8.2014 г. 20:50, Don Y wrote:
> Hi Dimiter,
>
> On 8/15/2014 2:46 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>
>> this might be the case though the people I have been in contact
>> with did not look to be heading that way. Then if someone would
>> need to unsolder the flash in order to read it his chances to get
>> the cloning right are virtually 0 (here is the board:
>> http://tgi-sci.com/misc/nmc3top.gif ).
>>
>> Then cloning it would do them little good, I have taken precautions
>> against what a number of players already attempted - to write
>> some baloney PC software and interface it to the device which
>> does the job (and has all the software one needs accessible
>> from any RFB/VNC capable platform). Then they "sell" the "system"
>> at 20k euro instead of my 2k .
>
> But, could they just *copy* the board, the firmware AND the PC
> software?  I.e., become an "unlicensed manufacturer and distributor"
> of your product?  ILLEGALLY??

Hi Don,

(me back after a days walk and almost 14 hours sleep :-)

there is no PC software involved other than a freely available
RFB client ( realVNC ) and a browser. So once you clone the device
successfully it will work as if it came from us here - and look
that way, however, so eventually people would recognize what it is.
But even the most experienced of us here would find it very very
tricky to clone the thing and preserve all the specs, the analog
conditioning part is simple but very hard to duplicate. I don't
think anyone capable of that would not have a better job to do.
The market is so small that it makes no commercial sense to do that;
now since the netmca does things no other spectrometer can do
(better resolution etc.) non-commercial considerations might come
into play (not that I am aware of any), I don't know.

>> Which is not to say they can't sell a system at 20k, for that
>> it does not have to work - it only has to look as if it works
>> so the entire chain involved in the "deal" gets paid.
>
> <frown>  Eventually, a "customer" is going to need support and
> feel screwed.  Hopefully, they realize they have been screwed
> by the counterfeiter and not *you*!  Ideally, you can have a list
> of "registered owners" or some other credential so you can deprive
> customers of thieves any support and dry up the market that way!

You just won't believe how corrupt that market is. Our netmca may
sell at 2.2k euro but a competitors unit - the one deemed "best"
which can't match the netmca in resolution etc. - sells at 12k euro.
Others sell at 8k. They can afford even half of that price
for bribery (things I just don't want to get involved in,
I like the feeling of not being a thief). I once had a "customer"
to whom a "friend" introduced me hold a device of mine for over
than a year "waiting" for some money to come to pay; that "customer",
in collaboration with my "friend", was simply raising her bribe
price. Worst of all I knew what was they were doing and had no
winning move.... Eventually they got what they wanted, I got my
device back, the "customer" bought herself a new smartphone
shortly after etc. :-) . Well, the device did not stay orphaned
for too long.

Basically we succeed at places where they do need their equipment
to work or face closure and have no big cash to spend and distribute
down the chain (like for the customer providing "consulting"
services to the seller, the least of the bribery costs :-) ).

The unit comes back from a typical customer of the kind we
succeed at, I mean they are a genuine lab etc. Some link to
some competitor firm (more likely to some wannabe firm) is
of course possible, with the idea to make a system based on
a cloned netmca device and have 5-10 systems sold to their very lab.

But cloning will do them little good, they can just buy 5-10
netmca devices from us, will be cheaper than to clone it wasting
years. If they need a control interface in order to hide what
they are using so the sale can take place cloning will be
of no use to them, they will end up with the same device.

So generally I don't know if the failed flash is their fault,
may be not. Silicon fails rarely but sometimes it does fail,
go figure.

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff, TGI             http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/sets/72157600228621276/

In article <2vCdneLeWKq9wHPOnZ2dnUVZ5g2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
Tim Wescott  <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> wrote:
}I'm not sure what you mean by "illegally" in your comments.  If you mean 
}"can go to jail for doing", then no, it's not illegal to steal IP, at 
}least not in any jurisdiction that I know of.

In the UK, under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 it is an
offence to "make for sale or hire" "an article which is, and which he
knows or has reason to believe is, an infringing copy of a copyright
work". The punishment may include up to ten years imprisonment.
<URL: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/107 >

And in the USA the Digital Millennium Copyright Act specifies various
IP-related offences.

Hi Dimiter,

On 8/16/2014 5:38 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> (me back after a days walk and almost 14 hours sleep :-)

You're getting old!!!  :>  (at least you managed to find your
way back home!  ;)

> there is no PC software involved other than a freely available
> RFB client ( realVNC ) and a browser. So once you clone the device
> successfully it will work as if it came from us here - and look
> that way, however, so eventually people would recognize what it is.
> But even the most experienced of us here would find it very very
> tricky to clone the thing and preserve all the specs, the analog
> conditioning part is simple but very hard to duplicate. I don't

But, if they were dicking with the FLASH, they hadn't (yet?)
concerned themselves with the trickier aspects!

> think anyone capable of that would not have a better job to do.
> The market is so small that it makes no commercial sense to do that;
> now since the netmca does things no other spectrometer can do
> (better resolution etc.) non-commercial considerations might come
> into play (not that I am aware of any), I don't know.

Competitor trying to figure out what you've done? or how you've done it?

>>> Which is not to say they can't sell a system at 20k, for that
>>> it does not have to work - it only has to look as if it works
>>> so the entire chain involved in the "deal" gets paid.
>>
>> <frown> Eventually, a "customer" is going to need support and
>> feel screwed. Hopefully, they realize they have been screwed
>> by the counterfeiter and not *you*! Ideally, you can have a list
>> of "registered owners" or some other credential so you can deprive
>> customers of thieves any support and dry up the market that way!
>
> You just won't believe how corrupt that market is. Our netmca may
> sell at 2.2k euro but a competitors unit - the one deemed "best"
> which can't match the netmca in resolution etc. - sells at 12k euro.
> Others sell at 8k. They can afford even half of that price
> for bribery (things I just don't want to get involved in,
> I like the feeling of not being a thief). I once had a "customer"
> to whom a "friend" introduced me hold a device of mine for over
> than a year "waiting" for some money to come to pay; that "customer",
> in collaboration with my "friend", was simply raising her bribe
> price. Worst of all I knew what was they were doing and had no
> winning move.... Eventually they got what they wanted, I got my
> device back, the "customer" bought herself a new smartphone
> shortly after etc. :-) . Well, the device did not stay orphaned
> for too long.

(sigh)  Yes, as I was commenting upthread to Tim... the legal
system isn't the friend of "smaller shops".  Too many ways
to screw over a vendor!

> Basically we succeed at places where they do need their equipment
> to work or face closure and have no big cash to spend and distribute
> down the chain (like for the customer providing "consulting"
> services to the seller, the least of the bribery costs :-) ).
>
> The unit comes back from a typical customer of the kind we
> succeed at, I mean they are a genuine lab etc. Some link to

So, the evidence of it having been "opened" may have been one
of curiosity?  Or, perhaps trying to make the needed repair
without sending it in for service?  You mentioned you were not
positive that the FLASH had been tampered...

> some competitor firm (more likely to some wannabe firm) is
> of course possible, with the idea to make a system based on
> a cloned netmca device and have 5-10 systems sold to their very lab.
>
> But cloning will do them little good, they can just buy 5-10
> netmca devices from us, will be cheaper than to clone it wasting

People often operate under funny criteria!  E.g., the firm that
openly "copied" the PLC code and cloned the control system from us...
"Do you want to be in the control system BUSINESS?  Why not let
others deal with those sorts of issues so you can concentrate on
your primary business goals??"

<shrug>

> years. If they need a control interface in order to hide what
> they are using so the sale can take place cloning will be
> of no use to them, they will end up with the same device.
>
> So generally I don't know if the failed flash is their fault,
> may be not. Silicon fails rarely but sometimes it does fail,
> go figure.

Maybe just having the unit open increased the risk that they
"slipped" with a probe, tool, ESD, etc.

Had the component been socketed, then I would be more confident
that it may have been unseated/reseated just as a matter of
course ("I wonder if this thing is loose?").  One of the first
things I do when I rescue a bit of kit is to disassemble and
reseat all cables, etc.  Amazing how often this "fixes" problems!
(a connector/PCB working its way loose; someone servicing the
device and failing to correctly reinstall a cable in the proper
orientation, etc.)

<shrug>  If replacing the component did the trick, then just make
a mental note in case you see the problem again -- here or in
another unit!  "Unknown causes" always leaves me sleepless at
night...

<frown>

--don