Okay nice. I don't think there are only hobbyists affected of this thing....
So, why should I ever use FTDI chips again when I must control the complete delivery chain for this chips ? That sounds to expensive and risky for me. There are good alternatives...As if you didn't need before driver update. Or are you OK with using fake parts in your product?No, but it can happen. It happened many big manufacturers without there liability. Most time the chip-manifacturer then loses a little bit of money because the not selled chips. Now that shall be my risk, but I don't just lose some non existent profit. I lose costs of manufactoring, shipping, time to rebuild, reputation of customers, etc,etc....
So why just eat this toad whitout the need ?But now you have a great tool how to check to be genuine right away . However fakers likely will fix them soon.
Does it only kill devices with FTDI's VID? (Can the fakes have the VID reprogrammed?)
Put yourself in FTDI's shoes... It's a bold move, but I understand exactly why they did it.
What makes you think FTDI haven't already been trying to fight the cloners from the supplying end already?
FTDI enjoys a decent premium over the knockoffs and similar products due to brand recognition. Do you think they are going to piss away all that potential money just because some chinese cloners started selling counterfeit product?
Buying fake chips has ALWAYS been a bad deal for everybody involved.
Containing a stolen VID the device isn't USB standard compliant so you should not have expectations of it working in the first place. Possessors of stolen property generally have few rights regardless of their knowledge of it being stolen.
FTDI should have 'reclaimed' their VID, presumably not and option, I can't blame them for trashing the PID instead.Does it only kill devices with FTDI's VID? (Can the fakes have the VID reprogrammed?)
So, the drivers just changes the PID:VID to something else? On Linux, I guess, someone could just end a patch to the kernel tree for the driver adding the new VID:PID.
drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio_ids.h
Alexander.
For us, the circuit designers are the ones who decide which chip to use (or replace), and supply chain is a whole different department. If I had a lot of my products come back with broken FTDI chips, I'd probably conclude that the chips are crap and I'd better use something else.
For us, the circuit designers are the ones who decide which chip to use (or replace), and supply chain is a whole different department. If I had a lot of my products come back with broken FTDI chips, I'd probably conclude that the chips are crap and I'd better use something else.
You don't even need to patch the kernel, you can add the new ID at runtime via sysfs.
An FTDI driver wouldn't get installed or loaded if the device didn't have a matching VID/PID.
Please note that FTDI`s driver licence agreement will be broken if used with counterfeit devices.
This thread is currently going at ~100 views / minute.
I wonder if anyone from FTDI is following it, because it's the story of how people stopped using FTDI chips.
It's your driver that decides to attach itself to the device, not the other way around. The user doesn't 'select' your driver to be used with that competing device.
An FTDI driver wouldn't get installed or loaded if the device didn't have a matching VID/PID.Anyone who ships a FTDI device other than a simple serial converter with the factory VID&PID should be shot as it can cause major compatibility issues.
A new user called FTDI chip has already posted in this thread. FTDI don't care if people stop using clones of their chips.
I bought some RS485 boards from Ebay with an FTDI FT232 chip on them. Appearantly the chips are fake. I used them with Linux and they work fine. After plugging them into a Windows PC with the latest drivers they quit working (even with Linux). I think the FTDI driver somehow kills the fake FTDI chip. Not nice if you got a lot of these boards in the field
For us, the circuit designers are the ones who decide which chip to use (or replace), and supply chain is a whole different department. If I had a lot of my products come back with broken FTDI chips, I'd probably conclude that the chips are crap and I'd better use something else.
Thats how it works in reallity Maybee FTDI doesn't know that...
Make your drivers simply refuse to work with non-genuine ICs ... fair enough I suppose.
Willfully brick devices from another vendor, just because you are having legal issues with that other vendor .... not very nice, and possibly illegal.
It would be an issue if there were any other legitimate drivers that worked with these non-genuine chips but there are not and FTDI know it because the non-genuine chips use FTDI's VID and FTDI are the only ones able to create a legitimate driver for something with their VID.
Make your drivers simply refuse to work with non-genuine ICs ... fair enough I suppose.
Willfully brick devices from another vendor, just because you are having legal issues with that other vendor .... not very nice, and possibly illegal.They haven't bricked anything. They changed the PID so their older drivers will also simply refuse to work with non-genuine ICs. It would be an issue if there were any other legitimate drivers that worked with these non-genuine chips but there are not and FTDI know it because the non-genuine chips use FTDI's VID and FTDI are the only ones able to create a legitimate driver for something with their VID.
They haven't bricked anything. They changed the PID so their older drivers will also simply refuse to work with non-genuine ICs.
So, the drivers just changes the PID:VID to something else? On Linux, I guess, someone could just end a patch to the kernel tree for the driver adding the new VID:PID.
drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio_ids.h
Alexander.You don't even need to patch the kernel, you can add the new ID at runtime via sysfs.