From 4a96e1a2b274460f0222cc62d219f6e75bca4932 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: serversdown Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 20:55:18 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] docs(series4): the bench cable was confirmed a Benfei (Prolific) Closes the identification chain: firmware has no Prolific driver, a laptop answers on that cable where the Micromate does not, lsusb reported PL2303, purchasing history shows both FTDI and Prolific cables in circulation, and the physical cable on the bench is a Benfei. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Ru8Lg9HkkYvX9VWWo65SmL --- docs/micromate_protocol_reference.md | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/docs/micromate_protocol_reference.md b/docs/micromate_protocol_reference.md index f2c5bb3..b9e8610 100644 --- a/docs/micromate_protocol_reference.md +++ b/docs/micromate_protocol_reference.md @@ -2111,6 +2111,9 @@ So both types are in circulation and indistinguishable by eye. A unit handed th wrong one has no working modem port, and nothing about the cable's appearance says so. +**The cable on the bench during this investigation was confirmed to be a Benfei** +— the Prolific one. + ⚠ **Identify cables by chipset, not by looks.** `lsusb` on any Linux box: FTDI is VID `0403`, Prolific is `067b`. Note also that counterfeit FTDI chips are common in cheap cables — they carry FTDI's VID but may not behave like one,