exxos's Atari, Amiga & retro forum

Just to say that my YT channel will probably stay gone long term. Its something I stopped enjoying a while back and for various other reasons i would like to decrease my social media presence. This was just a good excuse tbh.

terriblefire wrote: 14 Sep 2020 11:52 Just to say that my YT channel will probably stay gone long term. Its something I stopped enjoying a while back and for various other reasons i would like to decrease my social media presence. This was just a good excuse tbh.

Anti social media it is, then :)

Regarding JLCPCB I was hoping to find that they f*cked up their permissions and used the production code on the PCB for the download.

Looking at a couple of PCB's I've ordered it seems the production code contains all the info you'd need; 2173945A_Y19_200822, where 2173945A is a unique customer number, Y19 indicates that it's my 19th order and 200822 is the order date in YYMMDD. So if you'd just find a security hole somewhere on their site it might be possible.

Still hoping that they have a shitty website instead of them leaking stuff on purpose. If the gerbers came from them, that is.

kludge wrote: 14 Sep 2020 11:58 Still hoping that they have a shitty website instead of them leaking stuff on purpose. If the gerbers came from them, that is.

There arent many options ... assuming that this guy has the gerbers and isnt just photoshopping...

Myself, Matze and Hase all have had boards pirated by this clown. Matze uses Gitlab, i have a private repo on my home network. The only common point is JLCPCB.

I''m not convinced thats a sanding job.. even with sanding the board is sooo tight to DRC specs that it would be very difficult to reproduce accurately without essentially retracing every track manually. Which may have happened but the reproduction looks too accurate.

Im sure its either is a JLC leak or its photoshopped.

terriblefire wrote: 14 Sep 2020 12:07 I''m not convinced thats a sanding job.. even with sanding the board is sooo tight to DRC specs that it would be very difficult to reproduce accurately

Have you seen any images of this cloned board working? Any screen images? Have you had anyone contact you to say Yes that they have purchased a board?

I only wonder if this is all bait and bullsh*t...

matt020 wrote: 14 Sep 2020 13:49

terriblefire wrote: 14 Sep 2020 12:07 I''m not convinced thats a sanding job.. even with sanding the board is sooo tight to DRC specs that it would be very difficult to reproduce accurately

Have you seen any images of this cloned board working? Any screen images? Have you had anyone contact you to say Yes that they have purchased a board?

I only wonder if this is all bait and bullsh*t...

Nobody has replied. I suspect we shut him down too soon.

Not sure what he gains from baiting. I know users like **** were backing this guy and attacked the people who told me about.

@exxos i can see tracks on that image... they match up with a real board and there are trace shadows where the logo should be.

terriblefire wrote: 14 Sep 2020 14:02 Not sure what he gains from baiting.

You... shutting down your work... is what he gains. Getting a reaction from you is what he gains. Possible financial gain if he can reproduce the boards cheaper (?) is what he gains. "Teaching you a lesson" is what he gains.

And as it unfolded, I think he had it won, all of the above were happening in his favour!! And then I think we saw it backfire as we see from posts on Amibay...

I was hoping I didn't need to go into that level of detail, however...

terriblefire wrote: 14 Sep 2020 14:02 @exxos i can see tracks on that image... they match up with a real board and there are trace shadows where the logo should be.

There could still be some residual traces.. Because a real PCB has them of course.. but there looks to be to much smudging going on.. The smudges look the same which, so either it is a paintbrush, or the guy has extremely greasy fingers... Even so to me the top of the PLD looks smudged out...

The only way to prove this would be to get a couple of black PCBs made yourself, and take exactly the same angled shots as the fake boards and see if you can see the tracks on that image clearly or not...

I don't think the image taken is of too bad of a resolution to cover up the entire board tracks, as I said, motherboard traces are clearly visible even though they are further away from the camera, but even a black PCB, while it can make the tracks harder to see, you should still be able to make them out a lot more clearly than in the image IMO.

I could be wrong, is probably a whole lot easier to photoshop the board than go to the trouble of reverse engineering...And I think probably still more plausible than a gerber leak somewhere... I guess you could always email him and ask who leaked in the Gerbers ? is not like he did not reply to you before...

terriblefire wrote: 14 Sep 2020 12:07 I''m not convinced thats a sanding job..

I also doubt its a sanding job, because there is no reason reproduce the complete silkscreen and only omit the logo.

I have looked at the silkscreen, and it looks too perfect to be a engineered copy... So it is either a leaked Gerber file somewhere(I really don't see any way he could have gotten them) , or photoshop IMO.

exxos wrote: 14 Sep 2020 15:32 I have looked at the silkscreen, and it looks too perfect to be a engineered copy... So it is either a leaked Gerber file somewhere(I really don't see any way he could have gotten them) , or photoshop IMO.

Wondering if this was a social engineering attempt to scam cash from a bad sentiment. that image... i wonder if its even his ...