2026-01-25 11:00:14
For certain high-security devices, such as card readers, ATMs, and hardware security modules, normal physical security isn’t enough – they need to wipe out their sensitive data if someone starts drilling through the case. Such devices, therefore, often integrate circuit meshes into their cases and regularly monitor them for changes that could indicate damage. To improve the sensitivity and accuracy of such countermeasures, [Jan Sebastian Götte] and [Björn Scheuermann] recently designed a time-domain reflectometer to monitor meshes (pre-print paper).
Many meshes are made from flexible circuit boards with winding traces built into the case, so cutting or drilling into the case breaks a trace. The problem is that most common ways to detect broken traces, such as by resistance or capacitance measurements, aren’t easy to implement with both high sensitivity and low error rates. Instead, this system uses time-domain reflectometry: it sends a sharp pulse into the mesh, then times the returning echoes to create a mesh fingerprint. When the circuit is damaged, it creates an additional echo, which is detected by classifier software. If enough subsequent measurements find a significant fingerprint change, it triggers a data wipe.
The most novel aspect of this design is its affordability. An STM32G4-series microcontroller manages the timing, pulse generation, and measurement, thanks to its two fast ADCs and a high-resolution timer with sub-200 picosecond resolution. For a pulse-shaping amplifier, [Jan] and [Björn] used the high-speed amplifiers in an HDMI redriver chip, which would normally compensate for cable and connector losses. Despite its inexpensive design, the circuit was sensitive enough to detect when oscilloscope probes contacted the trace, pick up temperature changes, and even discern the tiny variations between different copies of the same mesh.
It’s not absolutely impossible for an attacker to bypass this system, nor was it intended to be, but overcoming it would take a great deal of skill and some custom equipment, such as a non-conductive drill bit. If you’re interested in seeing such a system in the real world, check out this teardown of a payment terminal. One of the same authors also previously wrote a KiCad plugin to generate anti-tamper meshes.
Thanks to [mark999] for the tip!
2026-01-25 08:00:05
Making a truly flat surface is a modern engineering feat, and not a small one. Even making something straight without reference tools that are already straight is a challenge. However, the ancient Egyptians apparently made very straight, very flat stone work. How did they do it? Probably not alien-supplied CNC machines. [IntoTheMap] explains why it is important and how they may have done it in a recent video you can see below.
The first step is to define flatness, and modern mechanical engineers have taken care of that. If you use 3D printers, you know how hard it is to even get your bed and nozzle “flat” with respect to each other. You’ll almost always have at least a 100 micron variation in the bed distances. The video shows how different levels of flatness require different measurement techniques.
The Great Pyramid’s casing stones have joints measuring 0.5 mm, which is incredible to achieve on such large stones with no modern tools. A stone box in the Pyramid of Seostris II is especially well done and extremely flat, although we can make things flatter today.
The main problem with creating a flat surface is that to do a good job, you need some flat things to start with. However, there is a method from the 19th century that uses three plates and multiple lapping steps to create three very flat plates. In modern times, we use a blue material to indicate raised areas, much as a dentist makes you chomp on a piece of paper to place a crown. There are traces of red ochre on Egyptian stonework that probably served the same purpose.
Lapping large pieces is still a challenge, but moving giant stones at scale appears to have been a solved problem for the Egyptians. Was this the method they used? We don’t know, of course. But it certainly makes sense.
It would be a long time before modern people could make things as flat. While we can do even better now, we also have better measuring tools.
2026-01-25 05:00:37
We live in a golden age for MIDI controllers. [rheslip]’s contribution to the milieu is a twisty take on the format, in that it’s covered in an array of knobs. Thus the name—Twisty 2.
The controller can be built using the Raspberry Pi Pico or Pico 2. It’s set up to read a 4×4 array of clickable encoders, plus two bonus control knobs to make 18 in total, which are read via a 74HC4067 analog mux chip. There’s also an SK6812 RGB LED for each encoder, and an OLED display for showing status information. MIDI output is via USB, or, if you purchased the W variant of the Pi Pico/Pico 2, it can operate wirelessly over Bluetooth MIDI instead. The controller is set up to send MIDI CC messages, program changes, or note on/off messages depending on its configuration. Flipping through different modes is handled with the bottom set of encoders and the OLED display.
Few musicians we’ve ever met have told us they learned how to play the encoders, and yet. The cool thing about building your own MIDI controller is you can tune it to suit whatever method of performance strikes your fancy. If the name of this build alone has you inspired, you could always whip up a MIDI controller out of a Twister mat.
2026-01-25 02:00:50
![[nanofix] and his assortment of tweezers](https://hackaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/nanofix-tweezers-banner.jpg?w=800)
Attributed to Picasso was the notion that when art critics get together they talk about content, style, trend, and meaning; but that when painters get together they talk about where to get the best turpentine. We can extend that sentiment into the digital age by saying that when philosophers get together they talk about ideas, theory, and meaning; but when hackers get together they talk about where to get the best tweezers.
In this video [nanofix] runs us through his collection of tweezers talking about what he likes and doesn’t like for each. If you’re just getting into microsoldering this video will have some tips about where you should start, and if you’ve been soldering tiny stuff for a while you might find some ideas for a helpful new bit of kit, or two.
If you’re interested in tweezers and novel applications you might want to check out “smart” tweezers, which can read capacitance and resistance values on the fly. Or read about a suction based SMD tool, which can securely hold SMD components with less risk of them flying across the bench and disappearing forever into the carpet on the floor.
2026-01-24 23:00:51
Al and I were talking about the IBM 9020 FAA Air Traffic Control computer system on the podcast. It’s a strange machine, made up of a bunch of IBM System 360 mainframes connected together to a common memory unit, with all sorts of custom peripherals to support keeping track of airplanes in the sky. Absolutely go read the in-depth article on that machine if it sparks your curiosity.
It got me thinking about how strange computers were in the early days, and how boringly similar they’ve all become. Just looking at the word sizes of old machines is a great example. Over the last, say, 40 years, things that do computing have had 4, 8, 16, 32, or even 64-bit words. You noticed the powers-of-two trend going on here, right? Basically starting with the lowly Intel 4004, it’s been round numbers ever since.
I wasn’t there, but it gives you the feeling that each computer is a unique, almost hand-crafted machine. Some must have made their odd architectural choices to suit particular functions, others because some designer had a clever idea. I’m not a computer historian, but I’m sure that the word lengths must tell a number of interesting stories.
On the whole, though, it gives the impression of a time when each computer was it’s own unique machine, before the convergence of everything to roughly the same architectural ideas. A much more hackery time, for lack of a better word. We still see echoes of this in the people who make their own “retro” computers these days, either virtually, on a breadboard, or emulated in the fabric of an FPGA. It’s not just nostalgia, though, but a return to a time when there was more creative freedom: a time before 64 bits took over.
2026-01-24 20:00:52
When you’re testing or debugging some mains-powered gear, plugging it directly into the outlet can often be an exciting proposition. If such excitement is not really your thing, you can opt for an isolation transformer and other types of safeties. In the case of [Michał Słomkowski], he opted to take a few steps further by modding a vintage East-German isolating variac with a broken amp meter into an isolated AC/DC power supply and testing station.
The core is formed by the isolated variable transformer, to which a configurable DC output section, a current limiter and digital voltage and current read-outs were added. This enables a variable AC output of 0 – 330 VAC and 0 – 450 VDC on their respective terminals, with the incandescent light bulb providing an optional current limiter.
In its final configuration [Michał] has been using the device for the past four years now for a range of tasks, including the simulating of various undesirable mains power conditions, varying the speed of an old Soviet-era drill, powering vacuum tube devices, capacitor reforming and of course running 100-120 VAC devices from e.g. the US.
As far as feature set goes, we have to admit that it is an impressive device, indeed. Although some parts of it are clearly playing it fast and loose with best practices, with [Michał] admitting to not being an electrician, it was clearly engineered well enough to survive a few years of use, something which cannot be said for even professional laboratory equipment these days.
