grinders aren't needed. Mole grips remove the shear bolts much quicker and have no risk of damaging anything.

grinders aren't needed. Mole grips remove the shear bolts much quicker and have no risk of damaging anything.

I will take your word for it, you've done it all !

If direct OBD tuning had been available I think I would probably have been more tempted to have had it done to my vRS to be honest.

Something like a superchips bluefin unit you could just buy and plug and play to upload the map yourself (and take it off again should the need arise) would have been very attractive. Not saying this is any better than a 'proper' remap mind you but would have been a nice option. Shame never been available!

I will take your word for it, you've done it all !

Having witness both methods being carried out on my car that would make sense.

All they do with the grinder is score in a line across the head of the shearbolt which then allows them to use a flat headed screwdriver to turn it like a screw. Seems simple enough, although Shark scored a 10 mm groove into my ECU case where i guess he slipped which is not good but its only a superficial surface scratch, but I only found this when at Jabbasport. Mole grips on the other hand pose no risk to the ECU case and take alot less time to grip, twist and remove the shear bolts.

By the way, for your information on 'piggy back' engine management systems, I read a review of a Golf in a VW magazine recently, and the EMS cost over £1500, probably the reason why people go for remaps?

Which tuners have experience of this engine using a piggy back ECU so again its new territory and back to square 1.

That is certainly something I will not allow to be done to my car!

I allowed that to be done, I saw the before and after. Couldn't tell it had been done, the ecu was reassembled with new sheer bolts and put back in place as it should. Suppose I put great trust in the garage but they are heavily Involved now with revo and Motorsport :-)

Check out their monster

From my understanding, the difference between Skoda and Sony cases is that you own the whole car, seats, wheels, ecu, etc.. With a ps3 you own just the hardware. The software, you have a right to use under licence. The software licence agreement is the 85 page thing we scroll past and simply click accept be it on the iPhone, Android or Windows :-) However, within the terms and conditions of this will be restrictions stating that you may not decode, decompile, copy, etc... This would only be enforceable under civil law and have no relation to the Computer Misuse Act.

I don't ever remember signing any licence agreement to use the satnav, trip computer, ecu, when buying a car so my big assumption is that there isn't one. If there is I'd argue that it isn't enforceable (if ever required to) as the terms were not presented to me at the point of sale.

Anyway, I suppose all car manufacturers could apply licence terms to new car sales but it would be difficult to enforce, before we even consider policing this on the second hand market. The easiest way for them to do it is to simply encrypt the software with 128bit (or higher) encryption and close the door that way. I guess it is their intellectual property after all. Sorry if I bored anyone with my Sunday evening ramblings. :-)

From my understanding, the difference between Skoda and Sony cases is that you own the whole car, seats, wheels, ecu, etc.. With a ps3 you own just the hardware. The software, you have a right to use under licence. The software licence agreement is the 85 page thing we scroll past and simply click accept be it on the iPhone, Android or Windows :-) However, within the terms and conditions of this will be restrictions stating that you may not decode, decompile, copy, etc... This would only be enforceable under civil law and have no relation to the Computer Misuse Act.

I don't ever remember signing any licence agreement to use the satnav, trip computer, ecu, when buying a car so my big assumption is that there isn't one. If there is I'd argue that it isn't enforceable (if ever required to) as the terms were not presented to me at the point of sale.

Anyway, I suppose all car manufacturers could apply licence terms to new car sales but it would be difficult to enforce, before we even consider policing this on the second hand market. The easiest way for them to do it is to simply encrypt the software with 128bit (or higher) encryption and close the door that way. I guess it is their intellectual property after all. Sorry if I bored anyone with my Sunday evening ramblings. :-)

Very good point and this is exactly how I was drawing my parallel here.

If there was a company set up offering jail breaking for PS3 consoles (no codes published etc) service to "unlock its performance" etc I am pretty sure Sony lawyers would be all over them like a bad rash within 24 hours

The same thing happens to cars (in my opinion), with specialist companies you can buy specialist "hacking" hardware & software (as used by tuners) circumventing all security software and hardware yet it is not perceived in the same way (seemingly or yet) as the PS3 case. I personally find it strange. You mentioning terms of sale etc - I tried to find something but so far zilch. No hits on internet and nothing in my hard copy paperwork. Perhaps there is a "blanket" terms and conditions for selling new cars by manufacturers in UK? In the absence I thought it could be construed as an offense in the light of Computer Misuse Act et al.

Chipping consoles runs into legal problems because its primary purpose is piracy. A completely different scenario to remapping cars.

Perhaps, in both cases external parties generate profit from circumventing security protection mechanisms...

That cracked me up, even the official website calls it "unauthorized modifications" lol - page saved

http://www.sharkperformance.co.uk/news/article.asp?id=129

That cracked me up, even the official website calls it "unauthorized modifications" lol - page saved

http://www.sharkperf...icle.asp?id=129

of course its an un-authorized modification. It would only be authorized if VAG sanctioned it. ie Ford/Mountune.

Its more like the difference between dismantling your TV in your front room and walking into Curry's and starting to dismantle one on display.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

I'm locking this to tidy up. Please just rise above whatever is going on between you two / others, There must be more important things out there.

[Turns key!]

OK - About 50 odd posts hidden. Lets keep it on topic and with just questions from those who know sod all (like me), and answers from those that definitely know a lot, please....

http://www.spobd2.com/upload/service/fgtech_boot_tricore_user_manual.pdf - nice find, shows you where to solder things to should you be handy with your micro soldering iron. It looks like they moved on as this was on 2 years ago on briskie http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/153325-ecu-remap-warning-from-jkm/#entry1903953

http://www.spobd2.co...user_manual.pdf - nice find, shows you where to solder things to should you be handy with your micro soldering iron. It looks like they moved on as this was on 2 years ago on briskie http://www.briskoda....m/#entry1903953

"Nice find"? A manual of a cracked tool that only gives you info about which pad on the PCB is connected to certain pins in the processor.

About "unauthorized modifications"; I'm surprised it took some years before someone actually caught onto that wording. Simon(vRSy) understood exactly what I meant by that. Unapproved might have been a better word to use. Unfortunately as a foreigner, sometimes my command of the english language fails me.

If you want to read that text like the devil reads the bible, go right ahead. There's a very obvious mistake I left there on purpose, which every tuner who's copied that text to their website has copied too. Go ahead and find it

Honestly, I don't see where you're coming from with your messages. The pinouts are trivial, the problem is either the processor BIOS password protection, or having a correct bootloader.

Being the author of the software most tuners now use to bypass these security methods, I sort of think I know the protections we are facing quite well. You might know them as well or even better than I do, but somehow I doubt that. I honestly cannot understand your points. To me they seem completely irrelevant, and even absurd at times.

I look at the ECU aftermarket performance tuning scene, none-manufacturer sanctioned/approved and I have questions.

1. Hadn’t there be any access protections the point would be mute. However manufacturers constantly update their security protection mechanisms employing more and more sophisticated unauthorised access protection measures. How does ECU tuning stand in this light? Especially there is a whole industry making money out of it now. To further exemplify my point consider this dichotomy. I used PS3 example and a theoretical jailbreaking service. This is incomparably more widespread within mobile phones scene. Even Android being open source has bootloaders locked, eFuses installed and generally being protected from rooting by handsets manufacturers… I used to own the music, art, books I bought. Not any more, I just buy a license to use it, and a limited one at that! Microsoft is rumoured to implement “spying” soft in their future XBOX Kinect consoles doing a headcount of people watching films using their services – if there is more than 5 or 7 of you then you will be receiving a letter in a post informing you of breaching your copyright license and charging your account with additional public performance license or other such idiocy. Music sharing websites used to be perfectly legal until they woke up to a reality they can make money out of it so appropriate laws were force passed through the system… I do not want to discuss the examples just the main point and I am all FOR ECU tuning etc provided it is done properly i.e. not just using a laptop but mechanical engineering as well J
   
2. Safety and Vehicle Type Approval. As ECU is responsible for all active and semi active safety systems installed in the car how “fiddling” with it influences it? For an average customer of an ECU tuning shop knows anything can be changed during flashing (I know it is not the intention, everybody is very careful etc…) as this such activities are not controlled, do not have TUV, EN, CE testing or approval etc. Again, just a question.
   
3. As somebody posted here earlier firms like Shnitzer seem to be swaying towards “piggy back”/complete replacement ECUs. Is this how the ECU aftermarket mods scene is going to? Despite now being expensive (if it takes off as well as re-flashing business currently process are bound to drop) it has infinitely more customisation potential than secured OEM ECU’s.
   

As for the security measures in TC 1766 AUDO-NG family you are bound to know much more that I do being a pro Hex-Jockey. All I know those units are industry stalwarts shipped in a region of 100 million units so far. By their nature they need to be very flexible and well accessible but contain protection mechanism such as 32-bit password protected PFlash with on/off protection limit of four, ENDINIT and Watchdog Timer and as you say the correct bootloader (loaded from STADD 0xA0000000 i.e. external EBU hence the need to access the ECU I'd imagine) . The pinouts doc was just to show how it looks like, not all the members know and some might be interested.

One cannot do it through OBD II due to the traffic being encrypted using RS 1024bit protection. My comments re “dealers can do so you should be able to” was a bit tongue in cheek as it would need private keys or OEM kit “sourced”.

I also do understand your “annoyance/frustration” and branding my points as irrelevant or absurd for obvious reasons.

Wow, yawn lol! What's this post about again? :-D lol!

Err, remapping new ECU's I suppose?

Oh well, who cares, let's talk about the latest wax and how easy it is to rub... *goes off to try on a new microfibre mitt*

That extended break of yours Jabo has done you no favours on here!

Just a question - how does fitting a piggy back ECU differ regarding TUV etc, to remapping the original?

The nett effect is the same

I can think of one reason why companies are plugging piggy back units........it means they can try to screw £1500 out of you instead of £400

I look at the ECU aftermarket performance tuning scene, none-manufacturer sanctioned/approved and I have questions.

1. Hadn’t there be any access protections the point would be mute. However manufacturers constantly update their security protection mechanisms employing more and more sophisticated unauthorised access protection measures. How does ECU tuning stand in this light? Especially there is a whole industry making money out of it now. To further exemplify my point consider this dichotomy. I used PS3 example and a theoretical jailbreaking service. This is incomparably more widespread within mobile phones scene. Even Android being open source has bootloaders locked, eFuses installed and generally being protected from rooting by handsets manufacturers… I used to own the music, art, books I bought. Not any more, I just buy a license to use it, and a limited one at that! Microsoft is rumoured to implement “spying” soft in their future XBOX Kinect consoles doing a headcount of people watching films using their services – if there is more than 5 or 7 of you then you will be receiving a letter in a post informing you of breaching your copyright license and charging your account with additional public performance license or other such idiocy. Music sharing websites used to be perfectly legal until they woke up to a reality they can make money out of it so appropriate laws were force passed through the system… I do not want to discuss the examples just the main point and I am all FOR ECU tuning etc provided it is done properly i.e. not just using a laptop but mechanical engineering as well J
   
2. Safety and Vehicle Type Approval. As ECU is responsible for all active and semi active safety systems installed in the car how “fiddling” with it influences it? For an average customer of an ECU tuning shop knows anything can be changed during flashing (I know it is not the intention, everybody is very careful etc…) as this such activities are not controlled, do not have TUV, EN, CE testing or approval etc. Again, just a question.
   
3. As somebody posted here earlier firms like Shnitzer seem to be swaying towards “piggy back”/complete replacement ECUs. Is this how the ECU aftermarket mods scene is going to? Despite now being expensive (if it takes off as well as re-flashing business currently process are bound to drop) it has infinitely more customisation potential than secured OEM ECU’s.
   

As for the security measures in TC 1766 AUDO-NG family you are bound to know much more that I do being a pro Hex-Jockey. All I know those units are industry stalwarts shipped in a region of 100 million units so far. By their nature they need to be very flexible and well accessible but contain protection mechanism such as 32-bit password protected PFlash with on/off protection limit of four, ENDINIT and Watchdog Timer and as you say the correct bootloader (loaded from STADD 0xA0000000 i.e. external EBU hence the need to access the ECU I'd imagine) . The pinouts doc was just to show how it looks like, not all the members know and some might be interested.

One cannot do it through OBD II due to the traffic being encrypted using RS 1024bit protection. My comments re “dealers can do so you should be able to” was a bit tongue in cheek as it would need private keys or OEM kit “sourced”.

I also do understand your “annoyance/frustration” and branding my points as irrelevant or absurd for obvious reasons.

Wow that's a lot of techno-jargon lol!

I'd love to know what your background is Jabo and what you actually do for a living? Not having a pop at you or anything but just very curious as to if your apparent encyclopaedic knowledge is a result of a very good photographic memory and many hours put in searching the net or if you have any relevant professional qualifications or experience?

Might help to silence some of your doubters if you can fill us in!

Apologies for the "off topic" and no offence meant Jabo :-)

[*]Safety and Vehicle Type Approval. As ECU is responsible for all active and semi active safety systems installed in the car how “fiddling” with it influences it? For an average customer of an ECU tuning shop knows anything can be changed during flashing (I know it is not the intention, everybody is very careful etc…) as this such activities are not controlled, do not have TUV, EN, CE testing or approval etc. Again, just a question.

I'll bite but I don't know why I'm bothering, because I'm not sure you'll be receptive as you haven't been so far.

Which vehicle safety systems are present in the engine ECU and could be modified by tuners? Hint: the clue is in the name.

Tuners modify the engine ECU, there is a separate ECU for every other system; ABS/ESP, airbag/SRS, door locking etc. Changing the parameters that control the engine change the safety systems in the car about as much as having cornflakes for breakfast affects you having a flat tyre in 6 weeks time. It's technically possible to completely screw up some external systems with some ECUs if you really try hard enough but it would render those systems unusable altogether, which would be pretty obvious as the ESP and/or ABS lights would be illuminated indicating a system failure. Any customer would notice this immediately.

It's 'moot' not 'mute'.

The traffic is not encrypted. It has nothing to do with the traffic, the protection implemented is on the signing of the compiled binary file that's present in the ECU using the private key. The signing for this is encrypted by 1024 bit RSA. A change needs the checksum recalculating, then resigning (with the private key) for the map to be writable via OBD in a "protected" ECU, if the file is not signed then the ECU won't boot up.

It's nothing to do with the hardware that the ECU contains, or which boot pins are needed to access the processor's built in capabilities.

Back to the topic of 2013 cars that can't be remapped then? I'm all for useful discussion but it's not really fair for any future searcher to find all this lot when looking for a simple answer.

He already new all of that