Homebrew SigHax Updates and Discussion Thread

[Roboman]

yeah but k9 has. and the rumors to an arm11 khexploit are around, so basically we just need that and then safefirmlaunchhax to get arm9 access

They fixed safehax.

 

[metroid maniac]

Wasn't they blocked dsiware hand access in 11.3?

It's impossible to block DSiWare NAND access.
What they blocked was being able to downgrade with NAND access.

 

[Cuphat]

It's impossible to block DSiWare NAND access.
What they blocked was being able to downgrade with NAND access.

I doubt it's impossible to block having full NAND access from DSiWare. It's probably not trivial though.

 

[metroid maniac]

I doubt it's impossible to block having full NAND access from DSiWare. It's probably not trivial though.

It's possible if you just disable DSiWare, I guess.

 

[Rubberduckycooly]

so, if i have A9LH installed and i upgraded to 11.3 (i haven't yet) would i still have arm9 access (could i install sighax on 11.3 with A9LH?)

 

[adrifcastr]

They fixed safehax.

afaik they just edited the KTimerObject stuff to not be able to have negative values. safe firm was not updated.

 

[The Catboy]

It's impossible to block DSiWare NAND access.
What they blocked was being able to downgrade with NAND access.

It is impossible to block that function, but since the homemenu has a NATIVE_FIRM require. That has caused things to get tricky

 

[Tenshi_Okami]

afaik they just edited the KTimerObject stuff to not be able to have negative values. safe firm was not updated.

They updated Native_Firm to do a Kernel Panic if they somehow do a firmlaunch of Safe_Firm. Essentially patching Safehax.

 

[adrifcastr]

They updated Native_Firm to do a Kernel Panic if they somehow do a firmlaunch of Safe_Firm. Essentially patching Safehax.

oh okay. thanks for the info.

 

[Bedel]

Question: once you have installed A9LH, what will sighax improve?
I mean I saw people comparing it to when we changed from menuhax to A9LH, and that was very much. But atm I cannot see how something can get better than A9LH (I know it'll be easier to install, but why would someone change to it if he already have A9LH?)

 

[adrifcastr]

Question: once you have installed A9LH, what will sighax improve?
I mean I saw people comparing it to when we changed from menuhax to A9LH, and that was very much. But atm I cannot see how something can get better than A9LH (I know it'll be easier to install, but why would someone change to it if he already have A9LH?)

read the OP

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

so, if i have A9LH installed and i upgraded to 11.3 (i haven't yet) would i still have arm9 access (could i install sighax on 11.3 with A9LH?)

I am not going to answer noob questions. Read the OP Thanks.

 

[Bedel]

read the OP

Yeah I did, but I still cannot see THAT improve some people say. I see how it's better, but not a real reason to change. It's nothing compared to changing from menuhax.

 

[adrifcastr]

Yeah I did, but I still cannot see THAT improve some people say. I see how it's better, but not a real reason to change. It's nothing compared to changing from menuhax.

did you missed the SIGNATURE part?

 

[Bedel]

did you missed the SIGNATURE part?

I did not. But a normal user won't really need it. And most of people here ARE users.

 

[adrifcastr]

I did not. But a normal user won't really need it. And most of people here ARE users.

I am not goint to discuss with another one who thinks he knows the world out of 3DS Hacking good bye. just leave this thread. nobody told you to be here if you don't like it. have a nice day.

 

[Bedel]

I am not goint to discuss with another one who thinks he knows the world out of 3DS Hacking good bye. just leave this thread. nobody told you to be here if you don't like it. have a nice day.

Why you seem to be ofended? I am not saying you not to install it, or if it's bad or A9LH is better or not. Indeed, I'm saying it's better, but I can't see why it seems to necesary to some people. If you don't wanna argue that I'm fine with it, but there are other ways to say it.
Also, you know nothing about me and about what I know, so please I'd ask you to be more respectfull.

 

[bailli]

Yeah I did, but I still cannot see THAT improve some people say. I see how it's better, but not a real reason to change. It's nothing compared to changing from menuhax.

You are completly right. The main benefit is an easier installation and the possibility to install it to *any* console with a hardmod.
Any other differences are hardly of interest for the "average" user. Most differences listed in the OP are vague and inaccurate IMHO.

Here is my list:

• Possibility to install to any working console with hardmod
  
• Possibility to install to bricked consoles with hardmod if the FIRM partition is still intact or an OTP backup and boot9 are available (as corrected by @Wolfvak thx)
  
• Easier installation as no OTP and therefore no downgrade to 2.1 is necessary
• OTP and some other very minor stuff (mostly hardware initialization stuff) is accessible which is locked out from A9LH

Here is my other list:

• I expect the "faster" boot time in the range of milliseconds
• "True CFW" is completely possible already with A9LH; any A9LH payload is already a "true" cfw since no Nintendo software is running when taking over ARM9
• A full-blown system replacement independent of Nintendo's OS is already possible, but too much work and completely unnecessary.
• "The disadvantage of being less dynamic than A9LH" is a question of implementation; you could code the custom FIRM to load a payload from SD (hm... this sounds very familiar... ?)
• Finally to emphasis this once more: The only flawed signature check is for FIRM0! (Not sure about FIRM1, probably, too) Any further check down the chain of trust does not have this flaw. An unsigned CIA will still not check out. Obviously you can patch your way down the chain of trust just like it is implemented right now...

 

[Bedel]

You are completly right. The main benefit is an easier installation and the possibility to install it to *any* console with a hardmod.
Any other differences are hardly of interest for the "average" user. Most differences listed in the OP are vague and inaccurate IMHO.

Here is my list:

• Possibility to install to any console with hardmod
• Easier installation as no OTP and therefore no downgrade to 2.1 is necessary
• OTP and some other very minor stuff (mostly hardware initialization stuff) is accessible which is locked out from A9LH

Here is my other list:

• I expect the "faster" boot time in the range of milliseconds
• "True CFW" is completely possible already with A9LH; any A9LH payload is already a "true" cfw since no Nintendo software is running when taking over ARM9
• A full-blown system replacement independent of Nintendo's OS is already possible, but too much work and completely unnecessary.
• "The disadvantage of being less dynamic than A9LH" is a question of implementation; you could code the custom FIRM to load a payload from SD (hm... this sounds very familiar... ?)
• Finally to emphasis this once more: The only flawed signature check is for FIRM0! (Not sure about FIRM1, probably, too) Any further check down the chain of trust does not have this flaw. An unsigned CIA will still not check out. Obviously you can patch your way down the chain of trust just like it is implemented right now...

That's what I meant! I can see how it will improve some things, but can't see how it could be better in some way to the user who already use A9LH. It will be the best for a new install, I'm sure, but don't think it'll be just like A9LH was to menuhax.

 

[Wolfvak]

I am not goint to discuss with another one who thinks he knows the world out of 3DS Hacking good bye. just leave this thread. nobody told you to be here if you don't like it. have a nice day.

> says he knows about 3DS hacking
> mixes up safehax with waithax

lol gg... I'd advise you to be a bit more calm when replying to people, independently of how experienced they *seem* to be.

Here is my list:

Possibility to install to any console with hardmod

That's not exactly true, it only works if you accurately know which FIRM is in the FIRM0 partition, which means this wont be able to fix any bricks (unless you have an OTP backup + boot9, in that case you can extract the console unique keys and encrypt it properly)

Here is my other list:

• I expect the "faster" boot time in the range of milliseconds
• "True CFW" is completely possible already with A9LH; any A9LH payload is already a "true" cfw since no Nintendo software is running when taking over ARM9
• A full-blown system replacement independent of Nintendo's OS is already possible, but too much work and completely unnecessary.
• "The disadvantage of being less dynamic than A9LH" is a question of implementation; you could code the custom FIRM to load a payload from SD (hm... this sounds very familiar... ?)
• Finally to emphasis this once more: The only flawed signature check is for FIRM0! (Not sure about FIRM1, probably, too) Any further check down the chain of trust does not have this flaw. An unsigned CIA will still not check out. Obviously you can patch your way down the chain of trust just like it is implemented right now...

Another small benefit which nobody seems to care about: when installing A9LH you're using illegally obtained keys, firmware files, etc. With this method you dont really need them, the whole boot procedure would be completely open source and perfectly legal... we wouldn't be using any keys extracted from their firmware or anything like that.

 

[adrifcastr]

> says he knows about 3DS hacking
> mixes up safehax with waithax

> thinks he is cool by posting this > does not recognize that the post he is talking involves fasthax and safefirmlaunchhax