Philippe Teuwen

BTW slurdge is on it, he did a first test moving everything to thumb, gained sth like 5 to 10%, not much, but this needs more test to make sure...

not everybody has 512, and RRG is open to everybody ;)

Exactly. Let's try staying

See also doegox/pm3-issues#43

I changed hf mf/mfu dbg to hw dbg. I touched slightly the description of data setdebuglevel. Do we want to move/rename setdebuglevel? If so how/where?

I removed entirely hf mf/mfu dbg but we can reintroduce them if you prefer. If we do so, I prefer we print a warning with the new command rather than...

yeah in root that's what I thought of too. dbg is too confusing with hw dbg inho. ``` pm3 --> clientdbg ? pm3 --> verbose ? ```

Regarding https://github.com/RfidResearchGroup/proxmark3/commit/2cbe43f269e47cb36817d6b42bb2c76014364e53#commitcomment-34659273 ( all dpbrint* commands should be guarded with DBGLEVEL ifs.) I see two options: * Add DBGLEVEL test in front of each Dbprintf. Tedious and still a risk...

yeah, ideally first be completely passive and listen to the entirely polling sequence, and extract all queries of the various standards. Be able to support e.g. the polling of an...

Relates to doegox/proxmark-internal#90 doegox/proxmark-internal#96 and doegox/proxmark-internal#76