Hacking WARNING - Gateway team bricks card ON PURPOSE!

[escherbach]

I can only repeat myself: Pirates get, what pirates deserve...

Ah well - not the original Neimod - shame - this thread was a riot while it lasted

 

[mathieulh]

To peole asking for assembly code 1. I personally don't care about your personal beliefs
2. I don't have IDA on my phone and I am not currently on my computer.
3. Why don't YOU take a good look at the decrypted gateway payloads ?

Just saying...it's not like a lot of developers haven't confirmed it already...

 

[Flame]

I can only repeat myself: Pirates get, what pirates deserve...

what the fuck.... is this real life.

 

[mr. fancypants]

I can only repeat myself: Pirates get, what pirates deserve...

hi neimod take a seat and watch how the fight...

 

[feebmc]

I wouldn't recommend this until someone has confirmed there is no bricking code in earlier builds but I think it is reasonably safe to say there isn't. For testing whether random SD corruption could leave you with a semi-functional ROP chain and possibly bricked gateway. Look at the launcher.dat in a prior version and run a tool on it to corrupt it or even run a tool on it just to focus on the ROP chain. You would need to run a simulator against this to get statistically valid results (it is unfortunate we don't have a basic 3ds emulator). My thinking (based on my experience with SD corruption) though is that it would take astronomical odds for the rop chain to load in a corrupted way and still be functional enough for the exploit to work.

This is just my opinion though and there are plenty of people in the scene who can easily actually test this out. Please don't use the gateway based on my experience.

 

[escherbach]

To peole asking for assembly code 1. I personally don't care about your personal beliefs
2. I don't have IDA on my phone and I am not currently on my computer.
3. Why don't YOU take a good look at the decrypted gateway payloads ?

Just saying...it's not like a lot of developers haven't confirmed it already...

Yeah I looked - couldn't find anything - but I've missed stuff like this before in IDA - heck - if I found it myself I'd be claiming the glory and posting now!

That's why I await one of you geniuses to post the address offsets for me

 

[minexew]

Yeah I looked - couldn't find anything - but I've missed stuff like this before in IDA - heck - if I found it myself I'd be claiming the glory and posting now!

That's why I await one of you geniuses to post the address offsets for me

I'm assuming you started with a diff against a supposedly clean version?

 

[escherbach]

I'm assuming you started with a diff against a supposedly clean version?

er - I did a checksum - why would I do a diff too?

 

[hiron]

I can only repeat myself: Pirates get, what pirates deserve...

GW users are pirates too....Its ok to steal from game companies but beware if you steal from our beloved GW, then its not acceptable. Talking about double standards....the fanboys.....

 

[mathieulh]

I'm assuming you started with a diff against a supposedly clean version?

As far as I know, Normmatt patched the initial checksum routine, not the eMMC corruption code, therefore you won't just find it through differential analysis.

 

[escherbach]

As far as I know, Normmatt patched the initial checksum routine, not the eMMC corruption code, therefore you won't just find it through differential analysis.

Yeah - or via a what a load of bollocks analysis

 

[mathieulh]

Yeah - or via a what a load of bollocks analysis

/me yawns....

 

[minexew]

er - I did a checksum - why would I do a diff too?

As far as I know, Normmatt patched the initial checksum routine, not the eMMC corruption code, therefore you won't just find it through differential analysis.

I meant a diff of whatever_is_the_latest_version against whatever_is_the_latest_non_bricking_version...

 

[Sonic4Ever]

Another lying thread? But if its true I think GW team doing the right thing, Why should clones steel GW's hard work....

It's calling a goddamn brick() function. That's proof enough.

 

[escherbach]

/me yawns....

/thread

I'm yawning too, maybe Mods should close the thread.

 

[justinkb]

Just saying...it's not like a lot of developers haven't confirmed it already...

read my posts for why this isn't an argument at all.

it's like asking sony to speculate on slander about problems with samsung televisions, they potentially have a financial incentive to lie.

 

[mathieulh]

It's calling a goddamn brick() function. That's proof enough.

Nah that's actually from the pseudo code (the function name) you can't actually get the real name for it, even though it does brick your console in the end xD

 

[gamesquest1]

right at this point im not going to get involved in any more discussion until we know 100% of the facts, this is just my opinion so far​

​

gateway has the right to protect their code upto a certain degree, if this means purposely putting traps into the firmware that can cause semi-bricks....i can sorta agree, just that they would have to do something major to scare people away from thinking the clones are just as good and safe as gateway, yeah its a bit mean but still its understandable to a degree​

​

BUT​

​

if there is any truth to the fact that they purposefully made the consoles 100% unrepairable i think that goes WAYYYYY beyond making a point, im all for scare tactics but just outright vindictive damage is way too far, they could of settled for bricking the console and forcing people to have to get it soldered and restored......that would of been perfectly sufficient to care people away from the clones and stop the clones from ripping off their firmware so quickly in future......but if it is true that it was done in a manner that makes the console permanently brick i really cannot justify that, that is just going above and beyond what was necessary and into the realms of being pricks....especially considering the fact that no matter how unlikely there is the potential of it hitting a genuine gateway customer, if it does turn out to be true nothing short of a full and frank explanation/apology should be given by gateway as they just took it way too far​

 

[justinkb]

It's calling a goddamn brick() function. That's proof enough.

this is just pseudo code, the brick() name even is their own invention, and its existence and the intentionality of it is unsubstantiated by any evidence as of yet.

the fact that they could have added a few hex offsets as proof, which would've taken 10 seconds, but neglected to do so, speaks volumes in my opinion.

 

[Arras]

So there is now a conspiracy theory about the conspiracy theory? Is this, dare I say it, conspiraception?