Re: [mh] relinking devices after PLM change?

The Link command has to contain the destination device's ID otherwise the
device ignores it, so you need to know it (or brute force 24 bits of ID)

On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 1:55 PM Marc MERLIN <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 06, 2020 at 01:44:55PM -0500, Spencer Ryan wrote:
> > You'd need custom hardware to do it. The insteon chipsets in the PLM mask
> > (2?) bytes of the Insteon ID when in monitor mode and the device isn't in
> > the ALDB. But yes, nobody ever said the protocol is secure and shouldn't
> be
>
> Oh, that's good to know.
>
> > treated as such. Just like you could brute force the possible
> combinations
> > if you really wanted to.
>
> Sure. That's 16,777,216 commands to send, so it takes a bit longer, but
> as you said, it can be done.
>
> > So it's not "secure" but it's quite a bit more secure than it used to be.
>
> Ok. Then I might be missing something. Make makes I2CS more secure? Just
> the fact that you have to send a link command before you can send a
> command afterwards, or something else I'm missing?
>
> Thanks,
> Marc
> --
> "A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" -
> A.S.R.
>
> Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/                       | PGP
> 7F55D5F27AAF9D08
>

________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from this list, go to: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/misterhouse-users