Author Topic: FTDIgate 2.0?  (Read 244013 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Gyro

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4663
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #875 on: March 18, 2016, 06:29:53 pm »
Noooh!  :palm:  After two weeks of peace too!  |O

EDIT: I suggest reading through all 36 pages of this thread to check that anything you're planning to say hasn't been said several times already!
« Last Edit: March 18, 2016, 06:36:18 pm by Gyro »
Chris

"Victor Meldrew, the Crimson Avenger!"
 

Offline janoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2910
  • Country: fr
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #876 on: March 18, 2016, 08:34:47 pm »
Perhaps I am blind but I really do miss the possibility to hide/ignore certain thread from the unread posts ...

 :palm:
 

Offline edavid

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2815
  • Country: us
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #877 on: March 18, 2016, 11:44:07 pm »
Perhaps I am blind but I really do miss the possibility to hide/ignore certain thread from the unread posts ...

You have to enable the feature:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/forum-update-new-ignore-topics-feature/msg651768/#msg651768
 

Online rsjsouza

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3391
  • Country: us
  • Eternally curious
    • Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #878 on: March 19, 2016, 02:34:50 am »
Perhaps I am blind but I really do miss the possibility to hide/ignore certain thread from the unread posts ...

You have to enable the feature:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/forum-update-new-ignore-topics-feature/msg651768/#msg651768
Thanks a bunch for this! I have been meaning to ignore several threads for a while.
Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico http://videos.vbeletronico.com

Oh, the "whys" of the datasheets... The information is there not to be an axiomatic truth, but instead each speck of data must be slowly inhaled while carefully performing a deep search inside oneself to find the true metaphysical sense...
 

Offline miguelvp

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5549
  • Country: us
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #879 on: March 19, 2016, 03:46:52 am »
At least they didn't include control characters in the infamous string. You know the 0-31 values that include things like AKC.

If a serial protocol is not robust enough then any cross talk on the wire will be more dangerous than the canned string FTDI decided to use.

I don't even think they use carriage return or line feed for that matter.

As for using an USB-UART cable when you are on a bind, how do you know it even has the FTDI chip? I guess you can research it, but if it's the only one available on the store, will you forgo and just delay the diagnosis?

"What if" someone open a putty terminal and pasted some random things to the serial port? You'll think whoever designed the protocol would not just talk to a plain port without verifying the system talking to the device is using  the right format and protocol.
 

Offline janoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2910
  • Country: fr
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #880 on: March 19, 2016, 12:43:42 pm »
Perhaps I am blind but I really do miss the possibility to hide/ignore certain thread from the unread posts ...

You have to enable the feature:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/forum-update-new-ignore-topics-feature/msg651768/#msg651768

Oh dear, you are my savior! Thanks a lot!
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 17650
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #881 on: March 22, 2016, 01:34:41 pm »
For all those still convinced you are safe when buying from a reputable source or FTDI's driver can't fail:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/microcontrollers/ftdi-chip-only-outputs-00's-has-anybody-also-seen-this/
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online all_repair

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 555
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #882 on: March 22, 2016, 01:52:06 pm »

At this time, and on this forum, with so many pages on this thread, who can blame FTDI anymore?  The blame goes squarely and totally on the one who still chooses FTDI .    :palm::palm:
« Last Edit: March 22, 2016, 02:01:11 pm by all_repair »
 

Online Ian.M

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8011
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #883 on: March 22, 2016, 01:58:56 pm »
This thread is 95% FUD. However the remaining 5% doesn't inspire confidence in FTDI.
Its just another nail in their coffin . . . . .
 

Offline Kilrah

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1751
  • Country: ch
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #884 on: March 22, 2016, 02:06:40 pm »
Didn't have courage to follow the thread, but it's obvious that their decision of breaking their driver was equivalent to shooting themselves in the foot and going from "selling chips to the big ones and having to put up with some counterfeits for the other markets" with "nobody wants anything from you anymore".
 

Offline cdwijs

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 49
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #885 on: March 22, 2016, 02:10:30 pm »
For all those still convinced you are safe when buying from a reputable source or FTDI's driver can't fail:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/microcontrollers/ftdi-chip-only-outputs-00's-has-anybody-also-seen-this/

Hey cool, I'm famous :-)
Kind regards,
Cedric
 

Online Koen

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 446
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #886 on: March 22, 2016, 06:08:47 pm »
We could wait for it to be confirmed and for the answer of Farnell/FTDI before taking it as gospel.
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 10200
  • Country: lv
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #887 on: March 22, 2016, 06:39:03 pm »
Unless cdwijs checks the event log for counterfeit device event while using some of the newer driver versions, it is a red herring at least for me. As stated in that tread, zeroes were transmitted with a very old driver version.
Also there were utility download link somewhere in the tread for checking for being counterfeit.
 

Offline r3bers

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 24
  • Country: ru
    • solovjov.net
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #888 on: April 01, 2016, 10:49:41 pm »
I have adapters with counterfeit chips for testing purposes. And I tested them about month ago. And they send&receive "NOT GENUINE DEVICE FOUND!" on drivers version 2.12.14.0 (22.01.2016)
Today they works fine. I noticed new version drivers 2.12.16.0 (09.03.2016)

FTDI catch us next time...

Photo for guessing: who is not genuine.
 

Offline elgonzo

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 690
  • Country: 00
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #889 on: April 02, 2016, 09:13:50 am »
Photo for guessing: who is not genuine.
The one on the lower left. It says "CN480661". CN is the ISO 3166-1 country code of China. And we all know where all the crap and the fakes are coming from, right? (<insert more China bashing here>)   >:D

(edit: I am joking. I have no clue which one is fake. Probably all of them... ;) )
« Last Edit: April 02, 2016, 09:16:27 am by elgonzo »
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 17650
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #890 on: April 02, 2016, 10:18:14 am »
The bottom-right one is real.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4727
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #891 on: April 02, 2016, 01:06:25 pm »
I have adapters with counterfeit chips for testing purposes. And I tested them about month ago. And they send&receive "NOT GENUINE DEVICE FOUND!" on drivers version 2.12.14.0 (22.01.2016)
Today they works fine. I noticed new version drivers 2.12.16.0 (09.03.2016)

Interesting! So someone from FTDI has a close eye on this forum? In this case: Thanks for doing the sensible!
 

Offline janoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2910
  • Country: fr
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #892 on: April 02, 2016, 07:39:47 pm »
Quote from: r3bers on Yesterday at 09:49:41 AM
I have adapters with counterfeit chips for testing purposes. And I tested them about month ago. And they send&receive "NOT GENUINE DEVICE FOUND!" on drivers version 2.12.14.0 (22.01.2016)
Today they works fine. I noticed new version drivers 2.12.16.0 (09.03.2016)

Interesting! So someone from FTDI has a close eye on this forum? In this case: Thanks for doing the sensible!

My bet would be more on the 800 pound gorilla from Redmond doing some behind the scenes arm twisting. Whichever way it is, if the drivers were really fixed, kudos!
 

Offline Rolo

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 206
  • Country: nl
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #893 on: April 03, 2016, 04:59:10 am »
I can confirm that after installing the new version drivers 2.12.16.0 (09.03.2016) on my windows 10 system the Arduino Nano clone works. I have been avoiding FTDI's for some time but had this Nano laying arround. It did not work on windows and after reading this post I got it working.

 

Offline Chipguy

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: de
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #894 on: June 30, 2016, 12:39:11 pm »
Hi !

Today I received an email from my board assembler that driver version 2.12.12 will yield a "NON GENUINE DEVICE FOUND" string on genuine chips that have certain date codes  :palm:  :palm:  :palm:

It also says that you should install version 2.12.16 in order to get around it.
I am now very pissed with that company to say the least. That attitude towards their customers is disgusting  >:( >:( >:(  :rant:  :rant:  :rant:

I leave a quote of the mail below, it's in german but you will get the idea:

Quote:
Bei der Inbetriebnahme des IC FT232R QFN-32 an einem USB Port, kann es unter Windows mit dem original  FTDI-Treiber (Version 2.12.12) zu Problemen kommen. FTDI hat in dieser Treiber Version eine Software Erkennung  für gefälschte Chips implementiert, die dafür sorgt, dass der Chip nicht mehr funktioniert bzw. in einem Terminal Programm die Meldung „NON GENUINE DEVICE FOUND“ erscheint (über COM Port / VCP-Driver). Leider verhalten sich auch originale FTDI-Chips auf die gleiche Weise.  Beheben lässt sich das Problem durch Installation der FTDI Treiberversion 2.12.16.
Betroffen sind die Date Codes 1549, 1550, 1551, 1552, 1601, 1604, 1606, 1608 .
Die o.g. Probleme treten nur unter folgenden windows-basierenden Betriebssysteme auf (nicht Linux oder MAC):

•             Windows 10 / Windows 10 x64
•             Windows 8.1 / Windows 8.1 x64
•             Windows Server 2012
•             Windows 8 / Windows 8 x64
•             Windows Server 2008 R2
•             Windows 7 / Windows 7 x64
•             Windows Server 2008 / Windows Server 2008 x64
•             Windows Vista / Windows Vista x64
•             Windows Server 2003 / Windows Server 2003 x64
•             Windows XP / Windows XP x64

Quote end.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2016, 12:48:29 pm by Chipguy »
Where is that smoke coming from?
 
The following users thanked this post: edavid

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 17650
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #895 on: June 30, 2016, 01:20:51 pm »
I vaguely recall being ridiculed when I proposed the situation (genuine chips being detected as fakes) described above could happen  :box:
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 
The following users thanked this post: Chipguy, Kilrah

Offline Chipguy

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: de
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #896 on: June 30, 2016, 02:19:28 pm »
Yay, I am "lucky" and got date codes 1549 and 1550  |O  |O  |O  |O  |O
That's the reason I have been informed in the first place.

And I also had 2.12.12 installed. Device really does not work  >:(
Other computer 2.12.10, works ok.
Updated the non working one to 2.12.18 and no problems anymore.

But I need to update the driver CD next week. DOH
That is still too much hassle.....
At least I can let others do the work this week  ^-^
Where is that smoke coming from?
 

Offline Chipguy

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: de
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #897 on: June 30, 2016, 02:21:11 pm »
I vaguely recall being ridiculed when I proposed the situation (genuine chips being detected as fakes) described above could happen  :box:

Well, you were right at the end.
That's why it is always a bad idea to do what they did.
Where is that smoke coming from?
 

Offline janoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2910
  • Country: fr
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #898 on: June 30, 2016, 04:06:55 pm »
I wonder where are the trolls who were furiously defending FTDI's actions now ...

 

Offline imidis

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 427
  • Country: ca
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #899 on: June 30, 2016, 04:58:01 pm »
Well, their plan works smoothly  :palm:
Gone for good
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf