Products > Test Equipment
TH2830 vs TH2832
zrq:
Maybe someone can try patching out the version checking routine, it's possibly easier than digging into the EEPROM which may need open box and desoldering.
tv84:
This is the mapping of both files Josh shared (all based in their header - the first 24 bytes):
--- Code: ---ST2830 FW:
Header: 41424344645E0700A03E1400
Signature: "ABCD" (MAGIC OK)
Block1 Size: 00075E64 [00000018-00075E7B]
Checksum Blocks1: 3AF4 [00075E7C-0007996F]
Block2 Size: 00143EA0 [00079970-001BD80F]
Checksum Blocks2: A1F5 [001BD810-001C7A04]
ST2832 FW:
Header: 4142434478560700A03E1400
Signature: "ABCD" (MAGIC OK)
Block1 Size: 00075678 [00000018-0007568F]
Checksum Blocks1: 3AB4 [00075690-00079143]
Block2 Size: 00143EA0 [00079144-001BCFE3]
Checksum Blocks2: A1F5 [001BCFE4-001C71D8]
--- End code ---
zrq:
Yeah. One certainly need to reverse the checksum algo to make the patched firmware file accepted in the upgrade routine. binwalk finds only SHA256 constants in the firmware package, so hopefully no asymmetric crypto.
>>>Oops, I missed that you are already trying that few posts ago.
KungFuJosh:
--- Quote from: tv84 on July 01, 2023, 06:40:42 pm ---This is the mapping of both files Josh shared (all based in their header - the first 24 bytes):
--- End quote ---
I don't know if it will help or not, but there was a 3rd file earlier as well, for the TH2830 fw.
tv84:
Now that I know how to calculate the FW Blocks checksums :popcorn:, tell me for what do we need this. :-//
As a PoC I've corrected the checksum for the FW I patched a few nights ago so that you can test.
Edit: Added patched FW with correct checksums (I think).
Edit2: For the FW, go here.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version