FS: Flir E4 w/ case 3.9 firmware unlocked with upgraded Resolution - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: theBigK
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2018, 12:13:37 am
content: Looking for $1000, price reduced for EEVblog members, I have it listed for $100 more on eBay!Bought it less than a year ago, performed the upgrade, and unfortunately hardly used it. Moving across the world, and can't take a lot of stuff...

author: tmbinc
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2018, 09:52:03 pm
content: I don't know how much the current FLIR hacks are still based on the initial version posted here, but that one had a very clear message:- By using this tool, you agree that you willremove the hack before selling the device.- TO REPEAT: UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES you are allowedto sell a device that has this hack installed.Now I think we all agree that for selling on eevblog, I doesn't matter much - people here are aware of how exactly the hack works etc. I have no issues with people selling things for what it's worth, and/or making a profit, but we must prevent that this hack is seen as having a commercial value attached to it. That would send a bad message to FLIR.So please - if you're selling outside of this forum, please remove the hack, if you want make it obvious that the hack can be applied, and I think everyone would be happy.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 09, 2018, 07:13:48 am
content: I don't see the problem? The OP is simply selling a device "as is". Hacked or not, its really not up to FLIR or any other company to dictate what an end-user decides to do with their products. Any EULA isn't worth the paper its written on unless tested in a court. Anyone can make any claim they like, it doesn't mean the end-user is legally bound to follow it, even if they "agree" to it.

author: TERRA Operative
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 09, 2018, 10:44:03 am
content: The problem for the end user is when the company sees the hacked equipment being sold and decides to make future products unhackable.It's not overly inconvenient to remove the hack for sale in order to maintain the status quo.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 09, 2018, 10:52:26 am
content: Quote from: TERRA Operative on December 09, 2018, 10:44:03 amThe E4 would never have been sold as much as it has without the upgrade, and I doubt E8 upgrades would have made up for it. Flir simply would have relinquished market share to competitors.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 09, 2018, 07:45:02 pm
content: tmbinc was referring to the conditions posted on This forum by the fellow forum members who worked hard and made the hack available, not to Flir. The modification was supposed to support the curious, not greedy ones. Next time there will be no interest for the smarts to share stuff if the agreements were not followed..

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 09, 2018, 09:57:35 pm
content: QuoteIt the perps behind things like this Ebay item that kill off the altruistic hacks for the rest of us:eBay auction: #223145408142

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 10, 2018, 01:32:22 am
content: Quote from: TERRA Operative on December 09, 2018, 10:44:03 amWhat difference would that make? Flir knows people are doing it. They know how the modification works. I suspect they would have discussed it as a possibility well before the product was even released.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2018, 01:47:47 am
content: QuotePossibly, but not in the way you imply. Having been in that kind of situation a few tmes, my experience says the person responsible (not necessarily the developer nor his immediate manager) will consider almost any obfuscation 'good enough'. People trying to hide stuff nearly always vastly underrate the ability of someone else to find it.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 10, 2018, 03:37:36 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on December 10, 2018, 01:47:47 amI'll absolutely take your word for it since you've been there before, but surely someone at Flir would have thought "If it's easy for us to do it, it's easy for anyone" or am I just using too much common sense? To me it was a deliberate design decision. I think the money they would have "lost" on sales for the E8 will have been supplemented due to the "hackable nature" of the E4.I guess what I'm saying is, it was deliberate and Flir don't care. However of course the usual caveats apply such as if you screw it up, it's not a warranty issue.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2018, 04:19:35 am
content: QuoteThey don't see it as easy. It's like expecting a programmer to notice his own bugs or spell checking your own book, etc.QuoteI am convinced you are wrong. If it was deliberate there wouldn't be any protection at all (which would make more sense commercially - no point in spending money where it's not needed, and there are ongoing costs for obfuscation quite apart from the initial implementation).As I see it, you are post-justifying a hack that FLiR absolutely didn't want to be known. Once it's out in the wild they can't do anything about it and, if they have any sense, they would put the best PR swing on it they can (cf. Keysight). But you'll notice that later versions try to fix it. Despite seeing loads of E4s being sold, they chose not to make it easier to sell even more E4s. They reallyreallywant you to buy pukka E8s instead.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2018, 05:05:39 am
content: Of course they tried to lock it. In versions 2.x a digital signature was introduced, and in versions 3.x an additional hash function on top of it. Both measures were defeated by the people on this forum.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2018, 09:47:51 am
content: QuoteForgot to say that, actually, it ain't easy. It only looks easy from this end of the completed hack, to someone that just downloads this, feeds it that, bosh. Start at the beginning with no prep and it's a very different matter indeed.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 12, 2018, 09:20:54 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on December 10, 2018, 04:19:35 amI'm just reinforcing the point that whether it was deliberate or not, what I or anyone else does with their hardware or software, that they purchased, us up to them, even if it means re-selling it and even if it means going against the manufacturers wishes, EULA etc... Provided I'm not reproducing counterfeit copies, I don't see an issue with modifying what is legally mine. Apple have tried to pull similar kind of nonsense and it hasn't ended well for them.You or others may disagree and that's OK too.

author: tmbinc
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 12, 2018, 09:47:54 pm
content: It was the "EULA" created by people in _this forum_ that produced the hack (which included me as well as others). It was our wish that people would not sell hacked cameras (or the hack itself). It's very likely not legally enforceable etc., but the deal was: "here's a hack that saves you a lot of money, we did the work for free, but we have one wish: please do not sell this hack or a camera with this hack installed". That was the only request. We didn't ask for donations, we (at least I) never attempted to make _any_ money with this, all I wanted was to limit the financial gain of anyone related to this hack. You could sell the camera without a modification but with a word like "and here's a link how you can upgrade", but that's a different thing to selling the camera with the hack pre-done. (In detail, by telling people that the hack can easily be done on their own, the financial value of the hack diminishes very quickly, because everyone can do it. If you sell the camera pre-hacked, that knowledge is not necessarily known to the buyer, so they may be inclined to pay more vs. a regular, unhacked E4. Hence you had a financial gain.)I find it a little bit sad that we're back to the discussion of whether FLIR approves this hack or not. That wasn't the question.(Sorry, I don't want to fuel any drama.)