starred/AirGuard
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/seemoo-lab/AirGuard.git synced 2026-04-25 15:35:49 +03:00
Code Issues 30 Projects Releases 10 Packages Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #126] Setting "status" byte to 0bXXXX1XXX makes AirTag undetectable #79

New issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-26 21:31:47 +03:00 by kerem · 3 comments
kerem commented 2026-02-26 21:31:47 +03:00
Owner
Copy link

Originally created by @filip-jaksic on GitHub (Apr 13, 2023).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/seemoo-lab/AirGuard/issues/126

Hello, I was playing around with making my own airtags and wanted to use the status byte for battery information. While doing so noticed that sometimes the tag would disappear from AirGuard.

After some testing narrowed it down to this: whenever the status byte is of the form 0bXXXX1XXX (X meaning either 1 or 0) it isn't detected by AirGuard. In other words, when the 4th least-significant-bit of the status byte is 1 then the tag doesn't show up at all in AirGuard. Is there a reason to this or is it just a bug?

Originally created by @filip-jaksic on GitHub (Apr 13, 2023). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/seemoo-lab/AirGuard/issues/126 Hello, I was playing around with making my own airtags and wanted to use the status byte for battery information. While doing so noticed that sometimes the tag would disappear from AirGuard. After some testing narrowed it down to this: whenever the status byte is of the form 0bXXXX1XXX (X meaning either 1 or 0) it isn't detected by AirGuard. In other words, when the 4th least-significant-bit of the status byte is 1 then the tag doesn't show up at all in AirGuard. Is there a reason to this or is it just a bug?
kerem 2026-02-26 21:31:47 +03:00
kerem commented 2026-02-26 21:31:48 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@filip-jaksic commented on GitHub (Apr 13, 2023):

I have looked elsewhere for an answer, but only found this kinda related but unanswered discussion under the "Discussion" tab. There one of you colleagues suggested to look into your AirGuard paper, which I did, but didn't find any explanation of the status byte except that the 5rd and 6th least-significant-bits represent the type of device (i.e. AirTags, 3rd party tags, AirPods, and other).

<!-- gh-comment-id:1507698732 --> @filip-jaksic commented on GitHub (Apr 13, 2023): I have looked elsewhere for an answer, but only found this kinda [related but unanswered discussion](https://github.com/seemoo-lab/AirGuard/discussions/116#discussioncomment-5403097) under the "Discussion" tab. There one of you colleagues suggested to look into your AirGuard paper, which I did, but didn't find any explanation of the status byte except that the 5rd and 6th least-significant-bits represent the type of device (i.e. AirTags, 3rd party tags, AirPods, and other).
kerem commented 2026-02-26 21:31:48 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@Sn0wfreezeDev commented on GitHub (Apr 19, 2023):

Thank you for the hint, this seems relevant to me and we should show them at least as an Apple Device in the app. Do I understand it correctly that these devices are not shown at all?

<!-- gh-comment-id:1514459421 --> @Sn0wfreezeDev commented on GitHub (Apr 19, 2023): Thank you for the hint, this seems relevant to me and we should show them at least as an *Apple Device* in the app. Do I understand it correctly that these devices are not shown at all?
kerem commented 2026-02-26 21:31:48 +03:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@Sn0wfreezeDev commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2023):

This commit should fix the problem:
https://github.com/seemoo-lab/AirGuard/pull/120/commits/dd63b310be1a4f8c0cae1a9bf35cd9510b6e5d68

If you see any different results, please comment again.

<!-- gh-comment-id:1517435090 --> @Sn0wfreezeDev commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2023): This commit should fix the problem: https://github.com/seemoo-lab/AirGuard/pull/120/commits/dd63b310be1a4f8c0cae1a9bf35cd9510b6e5d68 If you see any different results, please comment again.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
main
developmentNext
development
googlePlayRelease
dependabot/bundler/webrick-1.8.2
superTrackerProtection
PassiveLocationListener
serviceless
v2.0
3.0.2
3.0.1
2.7.1
2.7.0
2.6.2
2.6.1
2.6.0
2.4.1
2.4.0
2.3.1
2.3.0
2.1.1
2.1.0
2.0.1
2.0.0
1.4.0
1.3.4
1.3.2
1.2.0
1.1.1
1.1.0
1.0.6
1.0.5
1.0.4
1.0.3
1.0.2
1.0.1
v1.0.0
Labels
Clear labels   
bug

   
enhancement

   
good first issue

   
minor-bug

   
pull-request

Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request

  
question

   
wontfix
No labels
bug
enhancement
good first issue
minor-bug
pull-request
question
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
starred/AirGuard#79
No description provided.