| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bulut_01
Joined: 24 Feb 2024
Posts: 317
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2025 5:54 am |
 |
|
| temtronic wrote: | Perhaps you can 'ask somewhere' on the Internet if anyone knows about the 'transmitter/ receiver' you have ? If you post the make/model of the unit, maybe Google can supply a few 'hits'. If you get really lucky, the programmer who cut the code might see your request and respond.I'm finding lot of sites on Facebook on old computers / languages, rather nice to see others like me !
Your new excel sheet shows a 32 byte 'key' but you talk about 64 bits( 8 bytes). so again huge problem is not knowing what the key actually is. Until you do, it'll be a losing battle. Also remember even knowing what the key is, the algorithm, could have been made ' in house', a custom piece of code. In which case highly unlikely you'll be able to decode it. |
Thanks Temtronic, you've put me in a bad mood again.   |
|
 |
temtronic
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 9568
Location: Greensville,Ontario
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2025 7:39 am |
|
|
hopefully your headache will go away after you've figured out that 'banging your head against the wall' doesn't help you......
I fully understand WHY you want to solve this, but really it is virtually impossible. |
|
|
bulut_01
Joined: 24 Feb 2024
Posts: 317
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2025 7:52 am |
|
|
| temtronic wrote: | hopefully your headache will go away after you've figured out that 'banging your head against the wall' doesn't help you......
I fully understand WHY you want to solve this, but really it is virtually impossible. |
You seem to be thinking very pessimistically about this. The only impossible thing in the world is death. Everything else has its own phase. |
|
|
Ttelmah
Joined: 11 Mar 2010
Posts: 19928
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2025 10:44 am |
|
|
This all goes back to my earlier comments about a clue being needed.
You are assuming that the original data does have the bits just sent as
bits. This may well not be the case. For instance I have a system here
where the states of a number of input bits are coded as a 'status', and
it is this that is transmitted. Unless you have some clue as to what is
actually being sent, there is nothing to allow you to know when you
have a correct decode. Without this there are hundreds of trillions of
possible 'solutions', and you cannot know when you have the correct one. |
|
|
bulut_01
Joined: 24 Feb 2024
Posts: 317
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2025 11:10 am |
|
|
| Ttelmah wrote: | This all goes back to my earlier comments about a clue being needed.
You are assuming that the original data does have the bits just sent as
bits. This may well not be the case. For instance I have a system here
where the states of a number of input bits are coded as a 'status', and
it is this that is transmitted. Unless you have some clue as to what is
actually being sent, there is nothing to allow you to know when you
have a correct decode. Without this there are hundreds of trillions of
possible 'solutions', and you cannot know when you have the correct one. |
Welcome aboard, master. Where are you? The topic has reached page 100, and I haven't made any significant progress. Actually, there's a solid clue: remote control ID, channel information, button information, and the encrypted version. It could be the Tiny Encryption Algorithm. The possibility is very high. We have the plaintext and the encrypted 8-byte data array. Deciphering this array shouldn't be too difficult, given this information. |
|
|
newguy
Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Posts: 1923
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2025 1:02 pm |
|
|
| bulut_01 wrote: | | Deciphering this array shouldn't be too difficult, given this information. |
Then be my guest and go ahead and do it. What you so stubbornly refuse to accept is the opinion of people here who have "been there, tried that." It's a very difficult, if not nearly impossible, task to accomplish without more information. We've tried telling you that but you keep insisting that it can't be that difficult.
If it's not that difficult, go ahead and do it and stop asking for help. |
|
|
bulut_01
Joined: 24 Feb 2024
Posts: 317
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2025 1:07 pm |
|
|
| newguy wrote: | | bulut_01 wrote: | | Deciphering this array shouldn't be too difficult, given this information. |
Then be my guest and go ahead and do it. What you so stubbornly refuse to accept is the opinion of people here who have "been there, tried that." It's a very difficult, if not nearly impossible, task to accomplish without more information. We've tried telling you that but you keep insisting that it can't be that difficult.
If it's not that difficult, go ahead and do it and stop asking for help. |
If you're going to publish information, documents, or algorithms, please express your opinions. We don't have time to listen to fanciful rhetoric. What's not to be found here? There are people far more experienced than me. |
|
|
newguy
Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Posts: 1923
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2025 3:33 pm |
|
|
| bulut_01 wrote: | | There are people far more experienced than me. |
And we've all been saying what is essentially the same thing: you're trying to bite off more than you can chew. |
|
|
temtronic
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 9568
Location: Greensville,Ontario
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2025 7:37 am |
|
|
OK, I'm curious....what 's the brand/make/model information of the remote and receiver ?
Something that 'old', should have lots of hits..... |
|
|
bulut_01
Joined: 24 Feb 2024
Posts: 317
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2025 8:48 am |
|
|
| temtronic wrote: | OK, I'm curious....what 's the brand/make/model information of the remote and receiver ?
Something that 'old', should have lots of hits..... |
Last edited by bulut_01 on Sun Jul 20, 2025 6:17 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
temtronic
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 9568
Location: Greensville,Ontario
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2025 10:50 am |
|
|
one hit I found, for the remote....
We initially considered replicating the RF commands from the remote control using an NRF905 transceiver module. However, we discovered that the
communication was encrypted and could not be reverse-engineered.
....
seems you're not the 1st to try it !
will look for more when the sun sets here.... |
|
|
bulut_01
Joined: 24 Feb 2024
Posts: 317
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2025 11:02 am |
|
|
| temtronic wrote: | one hit I found, for the remote....
We initially considered replicating the RF commands from the remote control using an NRF905 transceiver module. However, we discovered that the
communication was encrypted and could not be reverse-engineered.
....
seems you're not the 1st to try it !
will look for more when the sun sets here.... |
Either this damn remote control will break me or I will break it |
|
|
temtronic
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 9568
Location: Greensville,Ontario
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2025 6:01 am |
|
|
| Sadly my money's on the remote, though I am hoping you succeed !!! |
|
|
bulut_01
Joined: 24 Feb 2024
Posts: 317
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2025 6:19 am |
|
|
| temtronic wrote: | | Sadly my money's on the remote, though I am hoping you succeed !!! |
Thanks for all your help, my friend Temtronic. I solved the encryption algorithm and the key. Perseverance won and there is nothing impossible in the world. |
|
|
temtronic
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 9568
Location: Greensville,Ontario
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2025 8:03 am |
|
|
| OK, please post your working results as I'm sure others would like to see them ! |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in
