dearsky/pico-fido
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 46 Pull Requests 1 Actions Packages Projects Releases 22 Wiki Activity

Applications type report error ? #210

New Issue
Open
opened 2025-12-04 14:39:53 +08:00 by IsayIsee · 12 comments
IsayIsee commented 2025-12-04 14:39:53 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

The application types displayed in yubico authenticator as follows:

Image

pico fido does not support OpenPGP and PIV.

additionally, will upgrading from version 6.6 cause data corruption? during previous testing, an upgrade resulted in data corruption on the key (before the release of 7.0).

The application types displayed in yubico authenticator as follows: <img width="1084" height="661" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/be8da023-e8e5-4cb0-91c0-b51352be412f" /> pico fido does not support OpenPGP and PIV. additionally, will upgrading from version 6.6 cause data corruption? during previous testing, an upgrade resulted in data corruption on the key (before the release of 7.0).
IsayIsee commented 2025-12-04 14:53:14 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

I tested it again:

  1. Reset the key using nuke

  2. Flashed version 6.6, set up OATH and OTP
    Image

  3. Flashed version 7.0, OATH and OTP data were normal, but the serial number was different from that in version 6.6.

Image

Will different serial numbers cause the passkey to become invalid?

I tested it again: 1. Reset the key using nuke 2. Flashed version 6.6, set up OATH and OTP <img width="1084" height="661" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4dcb39ec-c7f3-4c69-b46d-50a47cf9a278" /> 3. Flashed version 7.0, OATH and OTP data were normal, but the serial number was different from that in version 6.6. <img width="1084" height="661" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/570988e5-6758-4a99-906d-e5e02fc10b5d" /> Will different serial numbers cause the passkey to become invalid?
polhenarejos commented 2025-12-04 14:56:01 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

It shouldn’t.

It shouldn’t.
IsayIsee commented 2025-12-04 14:57:59 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

passkey pin damaged

Image
passkey pin damaged <img width="1084" height="661" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/78eea5f9-7358-4781-a0f6-d412a73417c4" />
IsayIsee commented 2025-12-04 15:03:51 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

even after re-flashing version 6.6, the PIN code still fails verification.

Image
even after re-flashing version 6.6, the PIN code still fails verification. <img width="1084" height="661" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/93c0f19a-a6a0-4496-bc8b-4bc07808ed98" />
polhenarejos commented 2025-12-04 15:26:34 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Was the pin ser on 6.6 or 7.0?

Was the pin ser on 6.6 or 7.0?
IsayIsee commented 2025-12-04 15:35:04 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

the PIN was set during initialization in 6.6. after upgrading to 7.0, PIN verification failed, and flashing back to 6.6 did not resolve the issue.

the PIN was set during initialization in 6.6. after upgrading to 7.0, PIN verification failed, and flashing back to 6.6 did not resolve the issue.
polhenarejos commented 2025-12-05 01:16:43 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Cannot reproduce.

  1. Nuked the board.
  2. Installed v6.6
  3. Set a PIN 1234
  4. Test PIN -> ok
  5. Upgraded to v7.0
  6. Test PIN -> ok
Cannot reproduce. 1. Nuked the board. 2. Installed v6.6 3. Set a PIN 1234 4. Test PIN -> ok 5. Upgraded to v7.0 6. Test PIN -> ok
IsayIsee commented 2025-12-05 09:28:25 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

i test again，use non daily use key, which one was tested earlier

1.Nuked the board.
2.Installed v6.6
3.Set a PIN 1234
4.Test PIN -> ok
5.Upgraded to v7.0
6.Test PIN -> ok
7.Nuked the board.
8.Installed v6.6
9.Set a PIN 123456
10.Test PIN -> ok
11.Upgraded to v7.0
12.Test PIN -> ok

then I used the daily-use test：
1.Upgraded to v7.0
2.Test PIN -> ok
but keeps spinning in circles

Image

3.restar windows
4.Test PIN ->ok
but still spinning
5.Test Use Passkey Login Web -> Fail

Image Image

5.re-flashing 6.6

Image
i test again，use non daily use key, which one was tested earlier 1.Nuked the board. 2.Installed v6.6 3.Set a PIN 1234 4.Test PIN -> ok 5.Upgraded to v7.0 6.Test PIN -> ok 7.Nuked the board. 8.Installed v6.6 9.Set a PIN 123456 10.Test PIN -> ok 11.Upgraded to v7.0 12.Test PIN -> ok then I used the daily-use test： 1.Upgraded to v7.0 2.Test PIN -> ok but keeps spinning in circles <img width="1084" height="661" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2e76a178-46a2-4864-be27-b9703a721914" /> 3.restar windows 4.Test PIN ->ok but still spinning 5.Test Use Passkey Login Web -> Fail <img width="456" height="459" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c7234c56-ec43-4ff9-9f93-71975cbb14e7" /> <img width="456" height="213" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1d0608fc-c10b-4d90-aab0-11a55a6c568f" /> 5.re-flashing 6.6 <img width="1084" height="661" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8d3b2f01-17eb-4754-9632-1a3ace23248d" />
IsayIsee commented 2025-12-05 09:32:28 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

i use self build eddsa firmware.

PICO_SDK_PATH=~/pico-sdk cmake .. -DPICO_BOARD=waveshare_rp2350_one -DENABLE_EDDSA=1 -DENABLE_POWER_ON_RESET=1 -DENABLE_OATH_APP=1 -DENABLE_OTP_APP=1 -DSECURE_BOOT_PKEY=../../ec_private_key.pem -DUSB_VID=0x1050 -DUSB_PID=0x0407

i use self build eddsa firmware. PICO_SDK_PATH=~/pico-sdk cmake .. -DPICO_BOARD=waveshare_rp2350_one -DENABLE_EDDSA=1 -DENABLE_POWER_ON_RESET=1 -DENABLE_OATH_APP=1 -DENABLE_OTP_APP=1 -DSECURE_BOOT_PKEY=../../ec_private_key.pem -DUSB_VID=0x1050 -DUSB_PID=0x0407
IsayIsee commented 2025-12-05 09:40:45 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

I've lost my data, I'll recreate everything from version 7.0. While the data loss issue won't affect me anymore during the upgrade, it might still impact others.

I've lost my data, I'll recreate everything from version 7.0. While the data loss issue won't affect me anymore during the upgrade, it might still impact others.
polhenarejos commented 2025-12-05 17:40:45 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

I am not getting the point. You said it worked but later you say it's not. I'm trying to reproduce it but I cannot find the way.

I am not getting the point. You said it worked but later you say it's not. I'm trying to reproduce it but I cannot find the way.
IsayIsee commented 2025-12-05 17:50:57 +08:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

The last test showed that PIN verification passed on the test token, so I upgraded the token I was using normally. After the upgrade, PIN verification also passed, but the passkey data could not be read and it kept spinning.

The last test showed that PIN verification passed on the test token, so I upgraded the token I was using normally. After the upgrade, PIN verification also passed, but the passkey data could not be read and it kept spinning.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
bug
Something isn't working
 documentation
Improvements or additions to documentation
 duplicate
This issue or pull request already exists
 enhancement
New feature or request
 good first issue
Good for newcomers
 help wanted
Extra attention is needed
 invalid
This doesn't seem right
 question
Further information is requested
 wontfix
This will not be worked on
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
dearsky
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: dearsky/pico-fido#210
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?