delayer:abrasive
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Next revision | Previous revision | ||
delayer:abrasive [2012/02/21 01:48] – created mcmaster | delayer:abrasive [2013/10/20 14:59] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ====== Lapping ====== | ||
- | |||
- | Used by some professional shops (Flylogic claims to use it as well as wet etching). | ||
- | *Procedure** | ||
- | * Apply very fine abrasive (optical polishing compound, <100nm grit is ideal) to turntable of some sort | ||
- | * Gently press die against turntable, checking periodically if layer is fully removed | ||
- | *Advantages** | ||
- | * Safe | ||
- | * Very flat surface | ||
- | * Moderate cost | ||
- | *Disadvantages** | ||
- | * Requires precision abrasives which may be expensive | ||
- | * Labor intensive | ||
- | |||
====== Sanding ====== | ====== Sanding ====== | ||
- | *Procedure** | + | Procedure |
* Secure (glue) die to surface | * Secure (glue) die to surface | ||
* Use fine sandpaper (1200+?) to remove a layer | * Use fine sandpaper (1200+?) to remove a layer | ||
* Using polishing paste, Dremel polish layer to photographic quality | * Using polishing paste, Dremel polish layer to photographic quality | ||
- | *Advantages** | + | |
+ | Advantages | ||
* Materials readily available | * Materials readily available | ||
* Safe (for user) | * Safe (for user) | ||
* Low cost | * Low cost | ||
- | *Disadvantages** | + | |
+ | Disadvantages | ||
* May not be as repeatable as chemical etching | * May not be as repeatable as chemical etching | ||
* Labor intensive | * Labor intensive | ||
* Risky, easy to grind too far | * Risky, easy to grind too far | ||
- | *Notes** | + | |
+ | Notes | ||
* Nohl used Dremel + sandpaper for his MiFare Classic attacks according to CCC talk | * Nohl used Dremel + sandpaper for his MiFare Classic attacks according to CCC talk | ||
delayer/abrasive.1329788903.txt.gz · Last modified: 2013/10/20 14:59 (external edit)