Timeline for Reverse engineering checksum from RS-485 device
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 3, 2019 at 13:58 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 166 characters in body
|
| Feb 27, 2019 at 16:28 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 526 characters in body
|
| Feb 27, 2019 at 9:24 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 408 characters in body
|
| Feb 27, 2019 at 9:10 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 408 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2019 at 19:50 | answer | added | Bruce Abbott | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 26, 2019 at 15:41 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 64 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2019 at 7:33 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 244 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2019 at 7:27 | comment | added | r a | @IgorSkochinsky I'll see if I can get the code used to record this stream. The source of the stream is a hardware device, used to drive 7-segment style dumb display. | |
| Feb 26, 2019 at 7:27 | comment | added | r a | @BruceAbbott Yes, it would appear that the spec doesn't match. I'm pretty sure the data is not corrupt, I checked all the packets' duplicates and found no difference. The start and end bytes match on all subsequent packets, and the data inside DATA0...n matches the true values, which are known. I'll update the first post | |
| Feb 25, 2019 at 20:41 | comment | added | Igor Skochinsky♦ | do you have access to the code on either sending or receiving side? might be easier to RE it than trying to guess the algorithm. | |
| Feb 25, 2019 at 18:57 | comment | added | Bruce Abbott | The specified packet format has 9 bytes, but your packets only have 8 and 7 bytes. So where did the extra bytes go, and where are you getting hi_ADDR from? According the spec hi/low address bytes start with high nibbles 8/9 and hi/low checksum bytes start with A/B, but your data does not have this. Clearly the spec does not match your data, so either it's 'outdated' or the data is corrupt. | |
| Feb 25, 2019 at 14:31 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 226 characters in body
|
| Feb 25, 2019 at 14:09 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 359 characters in body
|
| Feb 25, 2019 at 7:42 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 359 characters in body
|
| Feb 25, 2019 at 2:27 | comment | added | Bruce Abbott | "However, when the following CSUM calculation is done as specified in the documentation:" - are you sure you interpreted it correctly? Can you show us the full specification? | |
| Feb 22, 2019 at 23:35 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 3, 2019 at 9:16 | |||||
| Feb 22, 2019 at 20:45 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 32 characters in body
|
| Feb 22, 2019 at 19:10 | history | edited | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Improved formatting
|
| Feb 22, 2019 at 14:50 | review | First posts | |||
| Feb 22, 2019 at 23:18 | |||||
| Feb 22, 2019 at 14:49 | history | asked | r a | CC BY-SA 4.0 |