[wahttf87]

Originally Posted by mikewills

Thoughts? July/Aug 2021 production M2C, but several month older DME? Hmm.

Oh boy, I should check mine then, Mine is late 08/20 build

[NathObeaN]

Originally Posted by wahttf87

Oh boy, I should check mine then, Mine is late 08/20 build

Mine was an 07/20 build but late 06/20 DME . So frustrating.

[Karmic Man]

Not going to be done guys...stop waiting

No one is dumping money to actively crack the security of the last hurray of the S55, the minute volume of S55 sold with the new firmware simply doesn't justify it

If anything I expect people to dump money to crack the S58 instead, when that's done then may be the S55 has a chance

[to_riffic]

Originally Posted by Karmic Man

Not going to be done guys...stop waiting

No one is dumping money to actively crack the security of the last hurray of the S55, the minute volume of S55 sold with the new firmware simply doesn't justify it

If anything I expect people to dump money to crack the S58 instead, when that's done then may be the S55 has a chance

S58 has already been cracked. I had BM3 in my X3M and other tuners already have the S58 cracked. With the S55 in the CS, I personally don't feel like I need the extra hp unlocked. I'm happy with where it's at...

[msdss]

Originally Posted by to_riffic

S58 has already been cracked. I had BM3 in my X3M and other tuners already have the S58 cracked. With the S55 in the CS, I personally don't feel like I need the extra hp unlocked. I'm happy with where it's at...

it's the ecu not the motor. build date is everything. there have been x3ms rolling around for a while now.

[NathObeaN]

Originally Posted by msdss

it's the ecu not the motor. build date is everything. there have been x3ms rolling around for a while now.

And to clarify, worth noting that newer S58s (M3/M4) Supra, Mini etc are all plagued with the same issue. This isn't just about the M2 or S55.

[Enabled]

Originally Posted by NathObeaN

And to clarify, worth noting that newer S58s (M3/M4) Supra, Mini etc are all plagued with the same issue. This isn't just about the M2 or S55.

All Bosch ECUs in all Euro manufacturers with ECU date after 07/2020 have the same protection.

[M2_MEDUSA]

Originally Posted by Karmic Man

Not going to be done guys...stop waiting

No one is dumping money to actively crack the security of the last hurray of the S55, the minute volume of S55 sold with the new firmware simply doesn't justify it

If anything I expect people to dump money to crack the S58 instead, when that's done then may be the S55 has a chance

Because of the s58 we have an extremely high chance of being cracked. It's actually inevitable. Same securities. Everyone should be happy the the S58 came out because the last model S55 will go quicker due to same firmware. So yeah I'll wait (:

[Enabled]

Originally Posted by SpecialEdition_F87

Because of the s58 we have an extremely high chance of being cracked. It's actually inevitable. Same securities. Everyone should be happy the the S58 came out because the last model S55 will go quicker due to same firmware. So yeah I'll wait (:

The thing is, S58 uses Bosch MG1 dme, while the S55 uses the outgoing Bosch MEVD17. They are very different dmes. Essentially the crack for one will not guarantee anything for the other.
MG1 is interesting because you can do actual reads of the data over OBD. With the MEVD17 it's not possible.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Enabled

The thing is, S58 uses Bosch MG1 dme, while the S55 uses the outgoing Bosch MEVD17. They are very different dmes. Essentially the crack for one will not guarantee anything for the other.
MG1 is interesting because you can do actual reads of the data over OBD. With the MEVD17 it's not possible.

It depends what the actual issue is. It's possible they have very similar bootloaders even though the S55 DME is much older. They are all based on Infineon TriCore family MCUs. Being able to read flash over OBD doesn't mean too much. You can probably write to the flash on the bench easily, but it'll never execute what you write. Anyway, no one uses this obscure junk outside of automotive, so while I think someone skilled enough could defeat this in one way or another, they probably won't be wasting those skills on an automotive ECM. It's probably far easier to bribe a Bosch employee to leak the key and tool needed to sign the firmware.

[Enabled]

Originally Posted by chris719

It depends what the actual issue is. It's possible they have very similar bootloaders even though the S55 DME is much older. They are all based on Infineon TriCore family MCUs. Being able to read flash over OBD doesn't mean too much. You can probably write to the flash on the bench easily, but it'll never execute what you write. Anyway, no one uses this obscure junk outside of automotive, so while I think someone skilled enough could defeat this in one way or another, they probably won't be wasting those skills on an automotive ECM. It's probably far easier to bribe a Bosch employee to leak the key and tool needed to sign the firmware.

MG1 doesn't use the same Tricore, and some use an NXP processor. The new security is not in the BMW bootloaders. For the MEVD172G 07/2020++ dme and the 06/2020-- dme the software by BMW (bootloader and the programming/calibration) is exactly the same.

[infinitekidM2C]

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Enabled

MG1 doesn't use the same Tricore, and some use an NXP processor. The new security is not in the BMW bootloaders. For the MEVD172G 07/2020++ dme and the 06/2020-- dme the software by BMW (bootloader and the programming/calibration) is exactly the same.

I didn't say the security was in the BMW bootloader. I work in a different industry and the first stage bootloader is one-time programmed during manufacturing (in ROM) by ST Micro for some of our products, for example.

[Enabled]

Originally Posted by chris719

I didn't say the security was in the BMW bootloader. I work in a different industry and the first stage bootloader is one-time programmed during manufacturing (in ROM) by ST Micro for some of our products, for example.

Lol, the popcorn came out


I wasn't being argumentative nor even critical. If it seemed like it, I apologize, I'd like to make sure you didn't take it that way.
I was trying to add additional info, that the lock is not BMW related, and it's a different kind of protection from Bosch in other areas of the dme (Bosch bootloaders, etc). Although it's my opinion, I don't think if they find a way to bypass it in MEVD172x it would apply to MG1, unless the same backdoor (if any) was found available for both. There are ways to do custom changes to these newer dmes (such as generate a signed modded bootloader) but someone would lose their job and get heavy legal trouble for it. Been there, communicated this at end with contacts at BMW engineering.

[M2_MEDUSA]

Originally Posted by Enabled

Lol, the popcorn came out


I wasn't being argumentative nor even critical. If it seemed like it, I apologize, I'd like to make sure you didn't take it that way.
I was trying to add additional info, that the lock is not BMW related, and it's a different kind of protection from Bosch in other areas of the dme (Bosch bootloaders, etc). Although it's my opinion, I don't think if they find a way to bypass it in MEVD172x it would apply to MG1, unless the same backdoor (if any) was found available for both. There are ways to do custom changes to these newer dmes (such as generate a signed modded bootloader) but someone would lose their job and get heavy legal trouble for it. Been there, communicated this at end with contacts at BMW engineering.

Exactly my point. They share the same securities regardless of dme. If the S58 is cracked the S55 is right behind it. 90% of the job is done. This post should be changed from bad news for tuning community to good news for tuning community (: bless the S58.

[AmooManiak]

Originally Posted by SpecialEdition_F87

Exactly my point. They share the same securities regardless of dme. If the S58 is cracked the S55 is right behind it. 90% of the job is done. This post should be changed from bad news for tuning community to good news for tuning community (: bless the S58.

Source? This is not just an S issue, but across all manufacturers and models. Still waiting for any "good news" on this 🤣

[chris719]

Originally Posted by SpecialEdition_F87

Exactly my point. They share the same securities regardless of dme. If the S58 is cracked the S55 is right behind it. 90% of the job is done. This post should be changed from bad news for tuning community to good news for tuning community (: bless the S58.

We don't 100% know that. If a vulnerability is in Bosch source code then yes, it is quite possible there is reuse potential. If it's in vendor specific code from Infineon or NXP then it may not apply at all.

I still maintain the most practical route is simply to obtain the private key from Bosch. Yes, someone could get fired and arrested. That hasn't completely deterred people from accepting bribes for secrets in other industries.

[infinitekidM2C]

Any day now. I can "feel" it.

[Enabled]

Originally Posted by infinitekidM2C

Any day now. I can "feel" it.

The 03/2019 bootloader is still not cracked after 2 years for OBD flashing.
I'm not nearly so optimistic. It would be very welcome though!

[NathObeaN]

Originally Posted by Enabled

The 03/2019 bootloader is still not cracked after 2 years for OBD flashing.
I'm not nearly so optimistic. It would be very welcome though!

True. But the difference is that was a 'nice to have' with only a few companies having any interest. This is a 'must have' that affects many other car brands and is business impacting for tuning companies and garages all over the world. There is a much higher focus this time around.

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by NathObeaN

True. But the difference is that was a 'nice to have' with only a few companies having any interest. This is a 'must have' that affects many other car brands and is business impacting for tuning companies and garages all over the world. There is a much higher focus this time around.

Nice to have? It's the difference between selling a tune via email and having a customer make the decision to bring a car to a physical address for ECU out surgery.
I can guarantee that tune uptake drops dramatically for bench flash, so I'm not convinced it's merely a 'nice to have', it's costing a few companies big bucks in lost revenue.

[Megator]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Nice to have? It's the difference between selling a tune via email and having a customer make the decision to bring a car to a physical address for ECU out surgery.
I can guarantee that tune uptake drops dramatically for bench flash, so I'm not convinced it's merely a 'nice to have', it's costing a few companies big bucks in lost revenue.

Not 100% true. You can find tons of places that will unlock the S55 for 100E or so.

So its a 100E tax to get it unlocked localy and then upload BM3/MHD/ECUTek or whatever. As soon as my warranty runs out that is what I am doing.