[HN Gopher] Drone Hacking Part 1: Dumping Firmware and Bruteforc...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Drone Hacking Part 1: Dumping Firmware and Bruteforcing ECC
        
       Author : tripdout
       Score  : 127 points
       Date   : 2026-01-17 02:35 UTC (20 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (neodyme.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (neodyme.io)
        
       | nerdsniper wrote:
       | What a beautiful write-up! This is such a lovely resource for
       | anyone who ever has the curiosity of "I'm interested in getting a
       | firmware dump".
        
       | purplehat_ wrote:
       | For anyone else who got a little too excited at the title, ECC
       | here is error correction codes, not elliptic curve crypto.
       | 
       | Very cool writeup, thanks for digging into all those data sheets
       | and sharing it with us! I feel like the hands-on electronics
       | stuff has always been a little bit inaccessible to me, but posts
       | like these always make me a little more excited to start doing
       | little projects myself. So thanks for posting.
        
       | eimrine wrote:
       | Drane Hacking next: bypassing Radio Electronic Warfare.
        
         | speed_spread wrote:
         | Dead Reckoning + Physical Media + Return to Base
        
           | eimrine wrote:
           | What a laugher, of course it is not like that. Especially
           | funny sounds the return to base function.
           | 
           | Multi-frequency communication, a lot of retranslators making
           | you to be able to fly inside of caves, refusing to use
           | Starlink in the areas having a bleeding-edge anti-starlink
           | antennas deployed. Or just receiving Netflix-grade picture
           | from the optical cable while reducing to zero anything
           | emitting radio-signals.
        
       | aenis wrote:
       | Fantastic and inspiring write up, big thanks!
       | 
       | Here is to hoping someone will do something similar for DRM'ed
       | BOSCH ebike motors.
        
         | stavros wrote:
         | Be the change you want to see in the world.
        
         | mschuster91 wrote:
         | > Here is to hoping someone will do something similar for
         | DRM'ed BOSCH ebike motors.
         | 
         | Please not. Bike thieves are already annoying as they are (a
         | ring in the rural city I live in managed to steal over 400 kEUR
         | worth of bikes in a matter of months, in my case they only
         | stole the control unit), and so are people modding their bikes
         | to run (way) faster than the legal limit, leading to more and
         | more calls for them being banned off of normal bike tracks.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.idowa.de/regionen/landshut/landkreis-
         | landshut/se...
        
           | gessha wrote:
           | Is people stealing bikes and parts a technological problem or
           | a people problem?
        
             | Palomides wrote:
             | you could compare with apple locking down iphones and
             | parts, which I understand significantly reduced theft
        
           | IshKebab wrote:
           | I seriously doubt any kind of DRM is going to dissuade bike
           | thieves. It hasn't really worked for phones has it?
        
             | mschuster91 wrote:
             | It has. Yes people still steal iPhones but not even close
             | to levels pre-Activation Lock.
        
         | oulipo2 wrote:
         | We do it at https://infinite-battery.com :) our battery is
         | compatible with Gen2/Gen3/Gen4 (we haven't yet tested on smart
         | systems though)
        
       | mschuster91 wrote:
       | And as usual... something that looks like it uses Linux, but has
       | absolutely zero Google search results on how to obtain the GPL
       | sources.
       | 
       | We desperately need some large ass legal fund that takes the GPL
       | violators to court.
        
         | smokel wrote:
         | If they use unmodified Linux, then they only have to provide (a
         | link to) the source code to that kernel on request. No source
         | code is required for proprietary add-ons, unless they are
         | kernel modifications.
         | 
         | The GPL also does not state that the source code should be easy
         | to find. In the early days, one had to write a letter, send it
         | by mail, in hopes of getting a tape or CD-ROM with the source
         | code. For which you then had to pay as well.
        
         | wuschel wrote:
         | What could be the potential risk of not being compliant to the
         | software license at hand e.g. let us say we would sue a GPL
         | violator?
        
           | ofrzeta wrote:
           | There have been several trials, all of them won, I think
           | 
           | https://gpl-violations.org/about/
        
       | MPSimmons wrote:
       | Damn, I really enjoyed reading this. Great writeup!
        
       | vachina wrote:
       | Now do DJI next
        
       | Neywiny wrote:
       | Great work.
       | 
       | Seems like a typo when covering inversion. They claim parity(0) =
       | 0 but still use the equation with != from before.
       | 
       | It's nice to see that they, like me, subscribe to "an hour of
       | experimenting can save 5 minutes of reading the documentation."
       | Of course what people often fail to realize is that until you've
       | found the answer, you often don't realize what the documentation
       | was saying, such as the 16-bit thing. Management may ask "was
       | that not in the manual?" But it's more nebulous than that.
        
         | gessha wrote:
         | I bet you that one hour was full of excitement, where's the fun
         | in reading the documentation :P
         | 
         | Another great to look at it is possibly as a TDD approach vs
         | analyzing the problem at a deeper level.
        
       | dextrous wrote:
       | Thanks very much for this awesome write up! It's detailed labor-
       | of-love work like this that helps others (like me!) make great
       | jumps in learning. So appreciated.
        
       | syntaxing wrote:
       | Fun read! How long does the script take to run? I'm curious if
       | you would have noticed any performance increase if you wrote it
       | in C++.
        
       | duttybear wrote:
       | Bruteforcing ecc is the Services may subject to the contrary. My
       | vision of brutforcing is droning below sea levels, .
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-01-17 23:01 UTC)