[ale] OT - Replacement Gate Remote

[Lightner, Jeff]

In the article I cited they specifically mentioned the "burglar" "myth" and said no one could provide even one example of where it had ever happened.   (In fact they say Skylink suggested the real reason Chamberlain made multi code remotes was because low flying planes were accidentally opening garage doors - this doesn't happen when there are 2 codes being sent simply because the plane wouldn't be close enough to garage long enough for the second code to get there.)

I'd be interested to know if you are aware of any actual case law or links that specifically say manufacturers stopped making cloning remotes due to liability.   

However, at this point I know far more about remotes than I ever really wanted to.  :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org] On Behalf Of Alex Carver
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 10:23 AM
To: ale at ale.org
Subject: Re: [ale] OT - Replacement Gate Remote

The "stand by and clone someone" feature is mainly why they are no longer available.  It wasn't even really the DMCA issues, it was liability.  If the opener was easy to clone from any reasonable distance then people could have their homes or businesses broken into by others.
 Early remotes were single-code devices but those proved very easy to hack (one chip and not many codes to try).  The later ones have a base code and a "randomized" code (it's actually a revolving fixed series).
Still can be hacked but it's a little less trivial because the revolving series must be determined which takes several samples of data.

I've been working on my own using key crypto just as described (but not
the bluetooth part). :)    Going to try it with a door lock first.