Author Topic: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??  (Read 756300 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5909
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1725 on: June 11, 2016, 02:17:56 pm »
A driver which doesn't handle an unexpected situation properly is written by someone who doesn't know the first thing about programming. Since the old driver works and the new one doesn't it is very likely this behaviour is on purpose.

So MS has to retract the driver or replace it with a newer one soon again. Either because of its poor quality or because it's crashing the PC on purpose. Has FTDI any credibility left?
 

Offline Macbeth

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2562
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1726 on: June 11, 2016, 06:05:20 pm »
My couple of USB Blaster clones:



STM32 and PIC18. The STM32 doesn't work in Windows 10 and newer Quartus. It causes BSODs. Works ok in Linux. It is not bricked. The PIC18 works fine in Windows 10 and Linux.

It is really stretching it to say this one is FTDI's fault.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 20904
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1727 on: June 11, 2016, 06:16:28 pm »
It is really stretching it to say this one is FTDI's fault.
No it is not. It is their driver causing the crash.
Because a driver is such an integral part of a kernel it really should not crash under any circumstance because it usually takes the whole OS with it if something goes wrong. Therefore a driver is typically something you go through with a fine comb and catch whatever problem may be lurking. A driver is not the place to skimp on boundary and NULL pointer checks. Best case scenario: FTDI introduced a bug in their newer drivers in order to detect functional equivalent devices and more recently to remove that functionality again.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2016, 06:26:30 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 13123
  • Country: lv
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1728 on: June 11, 2016, 06:34:29 pm »
It is really stretching it to say this one is FTDI's fault.
No it is not. It is their driver causing the crash.
Because a driver is such an integral part of a kernel it really should not crash because it usually takes the whole OS with it if something goes wrong. Therefore a driver is typically something you go through with a fine comb and catch whatever problem may be lurking. A driver is not the place to skimp on boundary and NULL pointer checks. Best case scenario: FTDI introduced a bug in their newer drivers in order to detect functional equivalent devices and more recently remove that functionality again.
How should they catch a problem/bug which most likely is not even possible to occur with genuine ICs? Also I really doubt they care any tiny bit about emulated stuff like this one. This is not a competition for them, nor floods the market with fake ICs. Also, those are outright counterfeit devices anyway, so I doubt they really care about those shady manufacturers as potential customers. What I think is possible, because of authenticity checks in newer drivers, this poorly emulated crap does something weird and crashes not necessarily FTDI driver itself, it can as well crash USB host controller driver.
 

Offline Macbeth

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2562
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1729 on: June 11, 2016, 06:38:25 pm »
It is really stretching it to say this one is FTDI's fault.
No it is not. It is their driver causing the crash.
Because a driver is such an integral part of a kernel it really should not crash under any circumstance because it usually takes the whole OS with it if something goes wrong. Therefore a driver is typically something you go through with a fine comb and catch whatever problem may be lurking. A driver is not the place to skimp on boundary and NULL pointer checks. Best case scenario: FTDI introduced a bug in their newer drivers in order to detect functional equivalent devices and more recently to remove that functionality again.
Yes, if FTDI deliberately caused their driver to BSOD by detecting fakes (and these are not even fakes - they don't purport to be FTDI chips at all, merely emulating a protocol) then its back to "fuck FTDI". I maybe shouldn't give them the benefit of the doubt after their past shenanigans, but it could easily be just an incompatibility between the newer FTDI drivers and these particular emulations.
 

Online Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6043
  • Country: nl
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1730 on: June 11, 2016, 11:11:23 pm »
The driver is made for a special identifier that belongs to an ftdi chip.
No other manufacturer should be allowed to use that identifier, hence if you use a device that tries to emulate or pretend to be such a chip all results are your own problem, you should have used an official device. You can impossibly ask ftdi to test their driver with all illegal or cloned chips, that is ludicrous.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 20904
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1731 on: June 11, 2016, 11:45:35 pm »
The driver is made for a special identifier that belongs to an ftdi chip.
 You can impossibly ask ftdi to test their driver with all illegal or cloned chips, that is ludicrous.
Now imagine the scenario where the driver receives malformed data due to an USB issue. When writing a driver you are not done developing software when the driver appears to work. There is a lot more to it!

edit: typo
« Last Edit: June 12, 2016, 12:13:01 am by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline Macbeth

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2562
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1732 on: June 11, 2016, 11:51:07 pm »
@Kjelt - bollocks the 4 bytes "belong" to FTDI. Or anyone else has to be "allowed" to use those bytes.
 

Offline timb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2528
  • Country: us
  • Pretentiously Posting Polysyllabic Prose
    • timb.us
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1733 on: June 12, 2016, 12:27:04 am »
I think you have 70 pages of reading to do before you can even suspect that you might have anything new to add!  :palm:

Amen. Dude doesn't even know who Farnell (element14) are, yet thinks he has something to add.

It's not just Farnell, either. Digi-Key, Mouser, etc. have all had counterfeit chips slip into their distribution stream at one point or another. It happens.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic; e.g., Cheez Whiz, Hot Dogs and RF.
 

Offline Koen

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 527
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1734 on: June 12, 2016, 01:19:39 am »
About Farnell and FTDI, the bloke who claimed receiving counterfeits from them never came back to infirm or confirm it.
 

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 13123
  • Country: lv
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1735 on: June 12, 2016, 08:17:30 am »
@Kjelt - bollocks the 4 bytes "belong" to FTDI. Or anyone else has to be "allowed" to use those bytes.
They belong to FTDI, because they pay for them annually to USB-IF. http://www.usb.org/developers/vendor/
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6330
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1736 on: June 12, 2016, 08:58:31 am »
In what way is knowingly emulating a part illegal? The right to most aspects of reverse engineering and emulation for the purposes of compatibility are protected by law.
Not talking about legality of the hardware side of this this, it already starts to be illegal once you need to use FTDI driver with it. This is exactly the same as for example cloning SEGGER JTAG adapters or Saleae logic analyzers. Yes, software comes for free, as long as you use genuine device...
Quote
Direct copying of someone else's software
In this case inevitably illegally using someone else's software.
Quote
1.2          In this Licence a "Genuine FTDI Component" means an item of hardware that was manufactured for, and sold by, the Licensor or a member of the Licensor's group of companies. It does not include any counterfeit or fake products.

1.3          If you are a manufacturer of a device that includes a Genuine FTDI Component (each a "Device") then you may install the Software onto that device. If you are a seller or distributor of a Device then You may distribute the Software with the Device. If you are a user of a Device then you may install the Software on the Device, or onto a computer system in order to use the Device.

1.4          In each of those cases you may:

1.4.1          install and use the Software for your purposes only; and

1.4.2          only use the Software in conjunction with products based on and/or incorporating a Genuine FTDI Component.

1.5          The Software will not function properly on or with a component that is not a Genuine FTDI Component. Use of the Software as a driver for, or installation of the Software onto,  a component that is not a Genuine FTDI Component, including without limitation counterfeit components, MAY IRRETRIEVABLY DAMAGE THAT COMPONENT.  It is the Licensee's responsibility to make sure that all chips it installs the Software on, or uses the Software as a driver for, are Genuine FTDI Components. If in doubt then contact the Licensor.
Have you really read and thought about how ridiculous those conditions are? Consider a typical test setup with a mix of hardware. There may be some genuine FTDI and some FTDI emulating devices plugged in. The FTDI drivers are pulled in automatically, no questions asked. You don't really have a choice about which drivers are handling any particular piece of hardware. Unless you are seriously interested in finding out, you wouldn't even notice.

Just because someone writes stuff into an "agreement" doesn't mean courts won't have a good laugh about it. I wonder if there has ever been a court case to test this type of ludicrous attempt to restrict the use of drivers? Especially the part where FTDI cause malicious damage if they feel like it.

 

Online Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6043
  • Country: nl
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1737 on: June 12, 2016, 09:19:52 am »
@Kjelt - bollocks the 4 bytes "belong" to FTDI. Or anyone else has to be "allowed" to use those bytes.
They belong to FTDI, because they pay for them annually to USB-IF. http://www.usb.org/developers/vendor/
Exactly, if you use a standard, you need to play by the rules of the standard. If you use another vendors cheap device that offends the rules, don,t complain about the original vendors drivers, complain by the vendor that sold you cheap illegal crap. Complain by customs that allowed that illegal device to be imported at the first place, anywhere but those who do try to earn an honest living.
 

Offline Macbeth

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2562
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1738 on: June 12, 2016, 10:10:42 am »
@Kjelt - bollocks the 4 bytes "belong" to FTDI. Or anyone else has to be "allowed" to use those bytes.
They belong to FTDI, because they pay for them annually to USB-IF.  http://www.usb.org/developers/vendor/
Yes. Did you know I own 4 bytes too? 0x4D616362

You may not know it, but I drew up a contract and set up a standards org called the Macb Benevolent Fund. I won't go into all the legal small print and required standards of use, but ultimately anyone who quotes those 4 ASCII bytes in any internet posting is required to pay me $10,000 per year.  :-DD
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6330
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1739 on: June 12, 2016, 10:14:42 am »
Yes. Did you know I own 4 bytes too? 0x4D616362
Are you sure you're not ripping off Shakespeare?
 

Offline Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7027
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1740 on: June 12, 2016, 10:17:33 am »
And here we go into the puerile arguments again.
 

Offline Macbeth

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2562
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1741 on: June 12, 2016, 10:22:30 am »
Yes. Did you know I own 4 bytes too? 0x4D616362
Are you sure you're not ripping off Shakespeare?
I was worried about that but thankfully my highly paid legal specialists Screwem, Goode & Hart have advised me the copyright on Shakespeare's works expired centuries ago.
 

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 13123
  • Country: lv
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1742 on: June 12, 2016, 10:28:22 am »
@Kjelt - bollocks the 4 bytes "belong" to FTDI. Or anyone else has to be "allowed" to use those bytes.
They belong to FTDI, because they pay for them annually to USB-IF.  http://www.usb.org/developers/vendor/
Yes. Did you know I own 4 bytes too? 0x4D616362

You may not know it, but I drew up a contract and set up a standards org called the Macb Benevolent Fund. I won't go into all the legal small print and required standards of use, but ultimately anyone who quotes those 4 ASCII bytes in any internet posting is required to pay me $10,000 per year.  :-DD
Sure, then use them with your own interface, write your own driver and certify it for your own OS.
 

Offline Macbeth

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2562
  • Country: gb
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1743 on: June 13, 2016, 01:17:32 am »
@Kjelt - bollocks the 4 bytes "belong" to FTDI. Or anyone else has to be "allowed" to use those bytes.
They belong to FTDI, because they pay for them annually to USB-IF.  http://www.usb.org/developers/vendor/
Yes. Did you know I own 4 bytes too? 0x4D616362

You may not know it, but I drew up a contract and set up a standards org called the Macb Benevolent Fund. I won't go into all the legal small print and required standards of use, but ultimately anyone who quotes those 4 ASCII bytes in any internet posting is required to pay me $10,000 per year.  :-DD
Sure, then use them with your own interface, write your own driver and certify it for your own OS.
No. Those terms are not in my contract. The one you didn't know about or agree to be installed but was anyway when you upgraded to Windows 10.

You still owe me $10,000.
 

Offline HackedFridgeMagnet

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1989
  • Country: au
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1744 on: June 13, 2016, 02:00:25 am »
Ok you made your point about byte ownership.

It's been a while so what about the older discussion, the one as to whether FTDI acted illegally or criminally in any legal jurisdiction.
I am pretty certain there are no criminal charges pending, but tell me if I am wrong.
I haven't heard of any civil actions against FTDI, anyone heard any word on this?

Can I conclude that if there are no successful actions against FTDI that AFAWK they acted legally then?




 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 20904
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1745 on: June 13, 2016, 11:34:33 am »
Ok you made your point about byte ownership.

It's been a while so what about the older discussion, the one as to whether FTDI acted illegally or criminally in any legal jurisdiction.
I am pretty certain there are no criminal charges pending, but tell me if I am wrong.
I haven't heard of any civil actions against FTDI, anyone heard any word on this?
Can I conclude that if there are no successful actions against FTDI that AFAWK they acted legally then?
If you take legal action the benefits need to larger than the expenses. The thing is that nobody cares and just uses different chips.
If you drive/walk through a red traffic light you are doing something illegal yet you'll find you can get away with it without getting a fine every day. Does that make driving/walking through a red traffic light legal?
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6043
  • Country: nl
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1746 on: June 13, 2016, 12:21:52 pm »
Perhaps it was wrong (ethically) and not the wisest decision publicity wise, but not illegal IMO.
 

Offline HackedFridgeMagnet

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1989
  • Country: au
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1747 on: June 13, 2016, 12:23:21 pm »
IDK about the Netherlands but in AU if you report a crime to the police they have a duty to investigate it. So no direct out of pocket expenses.
I really doubt there was any ever a crime committed but am waiting to be proven wrong.

If you take legal action the benefits need to larger than the expenses. The thing is that nobody cares and just uses different chips.
If you drive/walk through a red traffic light you are doing something illegal yet you'll find you can get away with it without getting a fine every day. Does that make driving/walking through a red traffic light legal?
The law in this case is hardly as clear as for a red light.

This episode hasn't and probably will not be tested in court, and that is probably because FTDI can make a good case, resting on the fact that the driver is only meant to work with FTDI chips. As we all know connecting software with unknown hardware gives unspecified behaviour.

So I think calling FTDIs actions 'illegal' in this case is too strong.



 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 20904
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1748 on: June 13, 2016, 12:55:14 pm »
I don't care what you think because you are not a judge in a court  ;)

Ofcourse I could file a police report but putting the proof together in an unambiguous way is going to take me at least a day if not more. You can't go to the police or a lawyer and only pointing a finger. You need to have credible proof to back your story.

But it is not worth the hassle especially since most other USB-UART converters work out of the box with Windows 10.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2016, 01:01:06 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5909
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: FTDI driver kills fake FTDI FT232??
« Reply #1749 on: June 13, 2016, 01:11:23 pm »
So I think calling FTDIs actions 'illegal' in this case is too strong.

For Germany FTDI might want to read StGB ยง303a and $303b about computer sabotage. Bricking chips by modifying the IDs, sending "non genuine ..." instead of the original data or crashing PCs on purpose is an offence. And no, an EULA allowing that doesn't work either. 
 
The following users thanked this post: chris77


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf