--- /dev/null
+--
+-- lf_bulk_program.lua - A tool to clone a large number of tags at once.
+-- Updated 2017-04-18
+--
+-- The getopt-functionality is loaded from pm3/client/lualibs/getopt.lua
+-- Have a look there for further details
+getopt = require('getopt')
+bit32 = require('bit32')
+
+usage = [[ script run lf_bulk_program.lua -f facility -b base_id_num -c count
+
+ e.g:
+ script run lf_bulk_program.lua -f 1 -b 1000 -c 10
+]]
+author = "Brian Redbeard"
+desc =[[
+Perform bulk enrollment of 26 bit H10301 style RFID Tags
+For more info, check the comments in the code
+]]
+
+--[[Implement a function to simply visualize the bitstream in a text format
+--This is especially helpful for troubleshooting bitwise math issues]]--
+function toBits(num,bits)
+ -- returns a table of bits, most significant first.
+ bits = bits or math.max(1, select(2, math.frexp(num)))
+ local t = {} -- will contain the bits
+ for b = bits, 1, -1 do
+ t[b] = math.fmod(num, 2)
+ num = math.floor((num - t[b]) / 2)
+ end
+ return table.concat(t)
+end
+
+--[[Likely, I'm an idiot, but I couldn't find any parity functions in Lua
+ This can also be done with a combination of bitwise operations (in fact,
+ is the canonically "correct" way to do it, but my brain doesn't just
+ default to this and so counting some ones is good enough for me]]--
+local function evenparity(s)
+ local _, count = string.gsub(s, "1", "")
+
+ local p = count % 2
+ if (p == 0) then
+ return(false)
+ else
+ return(true)
+ end
+end
+
+
+local function isempty(s)
+ return s == nil or s == ''
+end
+
+--[[The Proxmark3 "clone" functions expect the data to be in hex format so
+ take the card id number and facility ID as arguments and construct the
+ hex. This should be easy enough to extend to non 26bit formats]]--
+local function cardHex(i,f)
+ fac = bit32.lshift(f,16)
+ id = bit32.bor(i, fac)
+ stream=toBits(id,26)
+
+ --As the function defaults to even parity and returns a boolean,
+ --perform a 'not' function to get odd parity
+ high = evenparity(string.sub(stream,0,12)) and 1 or 0
+ low = not evenparity(string.sub(stream,13)) and 1 or 0
+ bits = bit32.bor(bit32.lshift(id,1), low)
+ bits = bit32.bor(bits, bit32.lshift(high,25))
+
+ --Since the lua library bit32 is (obviously) 32 bits and we need to
+ --encode 36 bits to properly do a 26 bit tag with the preamble we need
+ --to create a higher order and lower order component which we will
+ --then assemble in the return. The math above defines the proper
+ --encoding as per HID/Weigand/etc. These bit flips are due to the
+ --format length check on bit 38 (cmdlfhid.c:64) and
+ --bit 31 (cmdlfhid.c:66).
+ preamble = bit32.bor(0, bit32.lshift(1,5))
+ bits = bit32.bor(bits, bit32.lshift(1,26))
+
+ return ("%04x%08x"):format(preamble,bits)
+
+end
+
+local function main(args)
+
+ --I really wish a better getopt function would be brought in supporting
+ --long arguments, but it seems this library was chosen for BSD style
+ --compatibility
+ for o, a in getopt.getopt(args, 'f:b:c:h') do
+ if o == 'f' then
+ if isempty(a) then
+ print("You did not supply a facility code, using 0")
+ facility = 0
+ else
+ facility = a
+ end
+ elseif o == 'b' then
+ if isempty(a) then
+ print("You must supply the flag -b (base id)")
+ return
+ else
+ baseid = a
+ end
+ elseif o == 'c' then
+ if isempty(a) then
+ print("You must supply the flag -c (count)")
+ return
+ else
+ count = a
+ end
+ elseif o == 'h' then
+ print(desc)
+ print(usage)
+ return
+ end
+ end
+
+ --Due to my earlier complaints about how this specific getopt library
+ --works, specifying ":" does not enforce supplying a value, thus we
+ --need to do these checks all over again.
+
+ if isempty(baseid) then
+ print("You must supply the flag -b (base id)")
+ print(usage)
+ return
+ end
+
+ if isempty(count) then
+ print("You must supply the flag -c (count)")
+ print(usage)
+ return
+ end
+
+ --If the facility ID is non specified, ensure we code it as zero
+ if isempty(facility) then
+ print("Using 0 for the facility code as -f was not supplied")
+ facility = 0
+ end
+
+ --The next baseid + count function presents a logic/UX conflict
+ --where users specifying -c 1 (count = 1) would try to program two
+ --tags. This makes it so that -c 0 & -c 1 both code one tag, and all
+ --other values encode the expected amount.
+ if tonumber(count) > 0 then count = count -1 end
+
+ endid = baseid + count
+
+ for cardnum = baseid,endid do
+ local card = cardHex(cardnum, facility)
+ print("Press enter to program card "..cardnum..":"..facility.." (hex: "..card..")")
+ --This would be better with "press any key", but we'll take
+ --what we can get.
+ io.read()
+ core.console( ('lf hid clone %s'):format(card) )
+ end
+end
+
+
+main(args)
projects / proxmark3-svn / blobdiff