Hello,

So I was doing a Configuration of IPC (UDD) via XML with DPS, and this cluster could not proceed - showed "Security Algorithm Error", or something along these lines..

This is strange, because I was programming with the very same XML p/n it already has (13492927.xml). The XML file was taken from SPS cache - so it couldn't be altered by someone..

XML file have algo No.21. I have also checked the utility file for the same gen cluster - it also has algo 21 for 0x27 step.

Current cal.files inside the cluster does correspond to what t2w cal info page is showing (only "Warnings" calibration have newer revision).
So it looks like everything is original, and last programming date suggests cluster was programmed at the factory or dealership, so it hasn't been swapped from next models (Insignia B or Astra K, or NA vehicles), which do have different algos...

UDD_ID_log.txt


Did anyone had this issue before?
Why there is an algo mismatch - have someone tampered with the memory (eeprom)?

Is there a way to proceed with programming and find out which algo it has (besides brute-forcing every possible algo)?

Hello,

Did you tried to do the configuration with SPS?

1 hour ago, Opelinsignia1985 said:

Did you tried to do the configuration with SPS?

No, why? What's gonna be different?
It's not very cost-efficient for me or the owner to pay for SPS to just remove UKC from RPO list.

The XML is from 2014 and software for IPC is dated no later than 2018, max.
Even quite dated versions of DPS will cover that if you suggest that DPS have some outdated algos/tables.

Fair point, I wasn’t suggesting SPS because DPS is too old for the XML/algo.

The reason I asked is that SPS may use extra metadata/workflow outside the XML itself with correct utility file mapping, security access level, session order, preconditions, or configuration sequence. DPS can still fail even if the XML and algo number look correct.

So if SPS can do it, that would prove the IPC/security is OK and the issue is likely DPS setup/workflow. If SPS also fails, then it points more toward the cluster/security state or memory/cal mismatch.

But I understand it’s not cost-effective just to remove UKC from the RPO list. I use the custom software nowadays for the configuration.