Ask Your Question

Safetynet-P plugin. Can somebody provide feedback?

asked 2023-03-31 08:50:49 +0000

GalloClaudio gravatar image

Hello everyone.

I'm fighting with a plugin that i made to read more meaningful information about Safetynet-P. Had to reverse-engineer it and it seems to be working a bit but it's far from complete. Is there anyone with more knowledge about Safetynet-P that can help me improve the plugin?

Help would be welcome. Thanks!

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete


The data in the capture seems to be mostly RTFN CDC (CDCN) frames as described on pages 14-15 here:
SafetyNET p Protocol. Presented By Sharani Sankaran

I didn't see a mention of type 0x43 so not sure if those are ACK or some end of data markers.

Chuckc gravatar imageChuckc ( 2023-03-31 14:46:11 +0000 )edit

Thanks! I see if i can add this info.

GalloClaudio gravatar imageGalloClaudio ( 2023-04-03 06:58:32 +0000 )edit

2 Answers

Sort by ยป oldest newest most voted

answered 2023-04-06 11:42:15 +0000

GalloClaudio gravatar image

I'm having some trouble translating this type of document into a Wireshark LUA but I will try to learn and edit the plugin. Thank you very much for this information.

edit flag offensive delete link more

answered 2023-04-06 08:43:40 +0000

Guy Harris gravatar image

Som poking around on the net found this posting about SafetyNET p which mentions a bunch of IEC standards.

It mentions IEC 61158, in which "SafetyNET p has been accepted as a Type 22.". That presumably refers to the IEC 61158-3-22:2014 standard, which is now withdrawn but still available for purchase if you have CHF 220 burning a hole in your pocket.

It also says that "The standard series IEC 61784-2, which evaluates the real-time communication of an Ethernet based system, has been extended to include the communication profile CPF 18, which describes SafetyNET p. In doing so, both performance classes were listed, RTFL as CP 18-1 and RTFN as CP 18-2." That appears to be in IEC 61784-2:2019, which is now available for a low low CHF 405 (act now, operators are standing by), but which has been replaced by a collection of smaller documents which, given the apparent absence of a IEC 61784-2-18:2023 standard, may no longer include CPF 18.

And it also says "The acknowledgment of the internationalen standards IEC 61784-3 with regard to safe communication, including the extension of SafetyNET p, will be announced shortly." IEC 61784-3:2021 appears, at least from the table of contents in the preview, to have CPF 18, and that'll set you bach CHF 360, but maybe they'll throw in paint protection and nitrogen in your tires if you go for that document.

"We can dance if we want to
We can leave your friends behind
'Cause your friends don't dance
And if they don't dance
Well, they ain't no friends of mine"

edit flag offensive delete link more

Your Answer

Please start posting anonymously - your entry will be published after you log in or create a new account.

Add Answer

Question Tools

1 follower


Asked: 2023-03-31 08:50:49 +0000

Seen: 417 times

Last updated: Apr 06