Java Development

[ghedeon]

The question is extremely simple:
Is it possible to emulate Mifare (Classic 1k/UltraLight) card?

Preconditions:

BB 9930 , API 7.0

Postconditions:

An external reader detects my device as Mifare card.

Thanks.

[ghedeon]

Well, it seems that the question isn't so simple...

[paulkayuk]

The extremely simple answer is Mifare Classic 1k, NO; Mifare Ultralight, YES.

[ghedeon]

Thank you for your quick response, paulkayuk! Let's concentrate on Mifare Ultralight. Do you have any idea(example) how to do this?

I've tried Virtual Target Emulation sample, but the automatically generated UID is 4 bytes one, and the Mifare UL's UID is 7 bytes one. As far as I know, I can't handle how the serial number is generated. Is it true?

[paulkayuk]

I was working on Tag Emulation yesterday, based on the Virtual target Emulation sample, and took a look at the various constructors for VirtualNDEFTag, and used the message + callback constructor as in the sample.  I couldn't see an obvious use (yet) for the constructors which also specify TechnologyType and UID.  No doubt down-the-road I will find a necessary use case, but with the simpler constructor my virtual tags are being recognised by other BlackBerries, Android, and an ACR122 USB reader, and that satisfied my immediate requirement.

[ghedeon]

Is it recognized exactly as Mifare card, or something like "ISO/IEC 14443 Type A"?

[paulkayuk]

I have not got the devices with me at the moment, I will check this evening and let you know.

[mwoolley · Accepted solution]

I don't think emulating a type 2 tag is possible from the APIs if we're strict about what we mean here. Type 2 tags work at ISO14443-3 whereas the API Virtualxxxxxx classes/interfaces work at layer 4 and are really designed for type 4 emulation. You can certainly emulate a generic tag which serves an NDEF message of course.

[paulkayuk]

You are, of course, right Martin, as a quick re-read of VirtualNDEFTag confirms. Generic Type 4 virtual tag only.

[mwoolley]

...or possibly just pedantic :-)

All depends what we really meant in the first place I guess!

A good discussion :-)