Re:Espressif's ESP32-C5 Is Now in Mass Production
by smarx007 on Thursday May 01, 2025 @05:48AM
(#43855550)
Thank you, an interesting (and somewhat sad) perspective. Would be unfortunate if these two regulations combined result in less firmware update capabilities not more.
Re:Espressif's ESP32-C5 Is Now in Mass Production
by mort96 on Thursday May 01, 2025 @06:06AM
(#43855685)
Yeah, it's sad. I can say with certainty that there are products whose developers would have decided to leave MCUs and/or SoMs writeable based on analysing the threat model, but where the rigid decision trees in EN-18031 around secure storage mechanisms and secure update mechanisms makes that too difficult to justify.
I don't doubt you with regard to what the RED and the CRA actually says. However I'm afraid that my understanding of it better reflects the practical real-world implications of companies who just need to go through the certification process.
18031 requires an update mechanism for most products, yes, however it some very stringent requirements for it to be considered a Secure Update Mechanism. I sadly don't have the 18031 standard anymore so I can't look up the specific decision nodes, but I know for sure that allowing anyone with physical access to just flash the product with new unsigned firmware would not count as a Secure Update Mechanism (I think unless you can justify that the operational environment of the product ensures that no unauthorized person has physical access to the device, or something like that).
EDIT: And I wanted to add, in one common use case for microcontrollers, namely as one part of a larger product with some SoC running Linux being the main application processor and with MCUs handling specific tasks, you can easily get a PASS in all the EN-18031 decision trees without an upgrade mechanism for the MCUs themselves. In such products, I can imagine a company deciding that it's easier to just permanently lock down the MCU with a write protect than to justify leaving it writeable.