So I want to buy a teensy for use with SET's usb hid attack vector, but I'm unfamiliar with the different models and their compatibility with each other. All the tutorial's I've seen use a Teensy 2.0, but I'd like to get a 3.2 or perhaps just an LC. Will I be able to use these other models, or is the 2.0 the only model that works?
Which Teensy should I buy for use with SET's HID attack vector?
- Thread starter Jolt
- Start date
- Status
Theremingenieur
Senior Member+
Do I correctly understand that you
a) want to bad things using a Teensy? ...and
b) dare to ask the community to help you with that?
If that's the case, I hope you won't get any support from here!
And if you already want to play the "hacker", you should at least know the difference between AVR and ARM based CPUs, and be able to study technical specifications and data sheets.
a) want to bad things using a Teensy? ...and
b) dare to ask the community to help you with that?
If that's the case, I hope you won't get any support from here!
And if you already want to play the "hacker", you should at least know the difference between AVR and ARM based CPUs, and be able to study technical specifications and data sheets.
Last edited:
PaulStoffregen
Well-known member
Teensy is about DIY electronics, and this forum is dedicated to those sorts of projects.
I do understand that there can be quite a gray, controversial overlap between legitimate computer security research and activities that appear to be criminal. Context matters. When that context is missing, it's easy to assume the worst.
If you really are just making a hacking tool without a well defined ethical & legal application, first I hope you'll reconsider and direct your efforts towards something much more productive. But if not, perhaps Teensy isn't the best product? Even though it can be programmed to act as a variety of USB devices, perhaps your "needs" would be better met by other products meant and actually supported for that purpose.
I do understand that there can be quite a gray, controversial overlap between legitimate computer security research and activities that appear to be criminal. Context matters. When that context is missing, it's easy to assume the worst.
If you really are just making a hacking tool without a well defined ethical & legal application, first I hope you'll reconsider and direct your efforts towards something much more productive. But if not, perhaps Teensy isn't the best product? Even though it can be programmed to act as a variety of USB devices, perhaps your "needs" would be better met by other products meant and actually supported for that purpose.
Honestly, if your level of comfort with these devices is "copy what a tutorial on Youtube is showing", then I'd recommend going with the exact same hardware that they're using... so if they're using a 2.0, get a 2.0.
I also hope you're using it for legal, good, educational, etc. purposes. Embedded systems, and engineering in general can be fun and exciting, and a great thing to learn... but there's nothing "cool" about copying someone else's work to do harm.
Pat
I also hope you're using it for legal, good, educational, etc. purposes. Embedded systems, and engineering in general can be fun and exciting, and a great thing to learn... but there's nothing "cool" about copying someone else's work to do harm.
Pat
I'm sorry for offending you guys; I understand your hesitation to help with this kind of information. Be rest assured, however, that I am only doing this for fun to try out on my computers as a test for what's possible in the area of penetration testing. But if you guys still don't want to help me, feel free to say so and I'll just try to do some more research into how these little devices work.
pictographer
Well-known member
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say I don't think anyone is offended, per se. I think there are two factors at work here:
I believe there is a huge societal good that comes from computer security research and everyone who gets into the field starts somewhere. I'd go further to say that the degree of ignorance about computer security among programmers approaches gross negligence in many cases. Software developers create products that shift risk to consumers without the consumers realizing it. If a car manufacturer ignored safety considerations, consumers would be rightly outraged, yet when we hear about the latest computer exploit, somehow it doesn't seem nearly as terrible.
So, I'd like to encourage you to learn what you can about the vulnerabilities of the USB stack and put that knowledge to good use teaching other people about the risks and ways of mitigating the risks.
Now, to your question. The Teensy boards before the 3.0 use 8-bit AVR processors. The Teensy 3.0 and later use 32-bit ARM Cortex-M4 processors. They have different instruction sets and different hardware capabilities like timers, interrupts, analog-to-digital converters, etc. The specialized hardware capabilities are configured and used by writing and reading to dedicated memory locations. In many cases, these differences can be fully abstracted by compilers and libraries. In some cases, an example program or library you might want to try will be written with processor-specific assumptions.
For most things, the Teensy 3.x models are simply better than the Teensy 2.x models. Exceptions would be due to compatibility, 5 volt operation, number of I/O pins and maybe a few more esoteric things.
- PJRC and friends do not want to encourage mischief and they're willing to err on the side of discouraging projects that have the slightest potential for mischief about them. The focus is on creating useful or artistic things that are generally harmless.
- PJRC like any company lives or dies based on its reputation. If PJRC got a reputation--no matter how undeserved--for promoting unlawful or anti-social behavior, the business could suffer.
I believe there is a huge societal good that comes from computer security research and everyone who gets into the field starts somewhere. I'd go further to say that the degree of ignorance about computer security among programmers approaches gross negligence in many cases. Software developers create products that shift risk to consumers without the consumers realizing it. If a car manufacturer ignored safety considerations, consumers would be rightly outraged, yet when we hear about the latest computer exploit, somehow it doesn't seem nearly as terrible.
So, I'd like to encourage you to learn what you can about the vulnerabilities of the USB stack and put that knowledge to good use teaching other people about the risks and ways of mitigating the risks.
Now, to your question. The Teensy boards before the 3.0 use 8-bit AVR processors. The Teensy 3.0 and later use 32-bit ARM Cortex-M4 processors. They have different instruction sets and different hardware capabilities like timers, interrupts, analog-to-digital converters, etc. The specialized hardware capabilities are configured and used by writing and reading to dedicated memory locations. In many cases, these differences can be fully abstracted by compilers and libraries. In some cases, an example program or library you might want to try will be written with processor-specific assumptions.
For most things, the Teensy 3.x models are simply better than the Teensy 2.x models. Exceptions would be due to compatibility, 5 volt operation, number of I/O pins and maybe a few more esoteric things.
- Status