This article delves into the world of Vcds Clone Cables, comparing two different versions based on their chipsets: the Atmega162 and the STM32F405. We’ll discuss functionality, performance, and potential security concerns.
Atmega162-Based VCDS Clone Cable: A HEX-CAN Imposter
The first cable tested utilizes the Atmega162 chip and requires a separate loader program to function. While marketed as a VCDS version 2 (V2) cable, it’s actually a HEX-CAN cable, an older generation. Priced at $29, this cable requires a loader flagged as malicious by VirusTotal.
Interestingly, the genuine Ross-Tech HEX-CAN cable also employs the Atmega162 chip.
Due to the security risk associated with the loader and its limited functionality, this Atmega162-based cable is not recommended for those seeking a true VCDS V2 experience. Using it within a virtual machine is advised for safety.
STM32F405-Based VCDS Clone Cable: A True V2 Contender?
The second VCDS clone cable, priced at $49, features the STM32F405 chip, similar to the genuine VCDS V2 cable. This version functioned without a separate loader or modification to the VCDS software.
Testing revealed faster logging speeds and improved overall performance compared to the genuine HEX-CAN cable. However, the STM32F405 chip was locked with Read-Out Protection (RDP) Level 2.
Bypassing the RDP revealed that the chip could be accessed and its RAM dumped. Further research is ongoing to achieve stable memory reading. A video demonstrating the RDP bypass process is available: https://youtu.be/4JFo23tYOq0
Conclusion: Genuine vs. Clone
While a genuine VCDS cable is always recommended, this STM32F405-based clone offers a functional alternative for budget-conscious users. However, compatibility with future VCDS software updates requiring firmware updates is uncertain. This clone was tested successfully with VCDS version 20.4.1.
