woukd you recommend a flex ug4 (or flex m1) over an ev3 or ev2 product? maybe i am still confused about nfc technology used for locking doors etc. i thought mifare desfire ev2 or ev3 was the way to go and the most relevant technology.
what can the flex ug4 (or m1) be used for additionally? like what are their use cases? i guess i see i can also use the ug4 for the lock i mentioned via MIFARE Ultralight EV1. any drawbacks to a ug4 compared to an ev2 or ev3 implant? the flex m1 does not seem to have any advantages over the other chips.
If you want security, DESFire. If you want interoperability with systems you don’t control/can’t enroll transponders into, go with a magic chip. You can’t have both in one package.
Also, currently the flexUG4 is unavailable as it is undergoing an antenna redesign.
I was going to mention that, and it would be worth waiting for.
Tac0s answered this in 2 sentences.
I would just add.
The FlexM1 is a good product and has a large compatibility list.
The FlexUG4 can emulate the FlexM1 and more (but not DESFire), the UG4 also gives you the most Future proof option, but as mentioned above, is currently unavailable due to the redesign.
The FlexDF2, of the 3 implants discussed here, is the most secure, However, I am not sure (read doubt) the lock you have employs DESFire security functionality, but is more likely just compatible, therefore, no more secure than the other 2.
Just another suggestion for you, Get yourself a Java Card Test Card
If this is compatiable with your lock, ot wont be any more or less secure than the other options (IF I am correct about your lock)
You would then have some options of more security based implants, and open a whole other world of opportunities for you in that realm
If the card is compatiable, then your options would be the Apex Flex or the FlexSecure would be your new options.
Both equally as good as each other, just one difference, but we can discuss that if the card works and choose this path.
The catch!? Well, I have had very limited luck finding compatiable locks to work with my ApexFlex, so until you try a test card, we won’t know if it will work or not (I haven’t tried my FlexSecure because its placement is more for security than access)
If it was my decision and had to choose
1…
Maybe the New FlexUG4for futureproofing
IF the Jave Card worked then either ApexFlex or FlexSecurefor Security
*by future proof, I mean, if you change locks, a new lock is released, or you travel to hotels etc. it has the most chance of being compatiable with other access systems.
I installed the xDF2 in my right hand 2 years ago and it’s working great and reliably, so I chose to put the xDF3 into my left hand.
While some of you claimed that there might be a range or power draw benefit of the xDF3, my experience is kinda the opposite from a usability point of view:
In all scenarios my xDF2 is read without any issues while my xDF3 has a really hard time to achieve proper coupling, regardless of the orientation and countless tries to find out how to hold my hand “the proper way”.
Both seem to be installed the same way ™ and the xDF3 had 1 1/2 months to heal properly, so I don’t assume any issues with tissue there.
Not sure why … but it’s been a bit frustrating -.-
So this is a self install? To be honest, performance depends heavily on depth of the installation. Are you right or left handed? Was needle angle controlled well for the installation? Does the xDF3 “feel” deeper than the xDF2? There are so many specific elements here that it would be very difficult to pinpoint performance issues purely on the xDF3… but it is possible performance or antenna tuning of that specific chip+antenna combination in that specific xDF3 is somewhat less than ideal.
No, I asked a listed installer who did the xDF2 for me as well. It feels installed the same way, but of course this is hard to tell just by looking at both hands from the outside
I just wondered if the xDF3 has a bit worse coupling performance in general - but judging from your answer this is not one of those “obvious” things
Oh yeah, I absolutely did, and they would indeed work well, but there’s a caveat:
Unfortunately our door readers absolutely HATE the repeater stickers.
As soon as you bring a repeater sticker near the reader, the reader automatically detects “something” and if I do not approach the reader with my chip AND the sticker at the same time, it fails.
As long as the sticker is next to the reader the reader never ends the current “session” and assumes the chip or whatever talked to it is still around, so you could in theory only use a sticker once and must remove it afterwards so the reader resets and the next person can start.
Guess the reader tries to be a bit too smart in this situation. Other than that, the stickers are a great thing!
Can you share more about the reader? This is the first time an issue like that has come up in my recollection. The repeaters don’t do anything but absorb and repeat reader signal so the session not ending thing is interesting. Like, what is it detecting?
I can see this happening on a reader that is operating in a low power “tag detection” mode. Most readers just look for field power drain in this mode, not communications. It then powers up and tries to talk to tags. This reader might do a little more than simply power up and passively look for tags… where typical readers might just look for a tag for a few seconds and go back to low power mode, this reader might consider not finding a tag as a failure at a higher level and actually produce an error / fail state.
Because of the way the stickers work, I’m very curious to see if the sticker can be applied to the reader… have it fail… keep the sticker there… then see what happens after the reader goes back to it’s normal mode. Either it will cycle through and claim failure again and just be in a never-ending fail cycle, or it will remain in its failed state and just wait for the sticker to be removed… or it could possibly go back to low power mode and operate normally with the sticker in the field. My hunch is that it’s possible the field tag detection mechanism is looking for heuristic change and not looking for something to go over a set level so to speak. Because the sticker was approaching the reader, there was a change in the field dynamic… but now that the sticker is there, the only change would be if a tag approached the reader.
Try leaving the sticker on the reader for an extended period of time and see what happens.
Hey folks
So I tried to apply the sticker long-term … didn’t work as the reader never came back to work, until I decided to take the sticker off again after 4 hours
Since tac0s asked - the reader in question is:
they are used on hundreds of doors on our campus -.-
Any they are absolutely happy with the xDF2, so I’m lucky having the option to also use the old one <3 but my colleagues that did not get to buy the xDF2 have a bit of a fiddly time getting their xDF3s to open the doors.
We will continue to try to get some decent performance out of this setup and report back on any findings
