From Team Xecuter:

This new 2.6 BETA of SX OS adds full support for Nintendo Switch firmware 7.x, including ALL functionality you expect when using our product. We've been pioneering our own unique and proprietary solution for defeating any future firmware protection and we're quite happy with the results so far.

This release is marked as BETA because we changed things drastically under the hood to streamline future firmware updates and some things may inadvertently behave differently.

That does not mean it hasn't been vetted at all, so give it a shot today!

Of course, we haven't been sitting idly behind the scenes either. A lot of our development resources and attention has been dedicated to bringing SX OS to those "unhackable" switches. We are working hard to bring the SX OS experience to all of you who are stuck with an "unhackable" switch. Stay tuned for more news!

Download here: -REMOVED-

 

[thaikhoa]

SX 2.6 update details have been revealed by hexkyz

Scripts updated for SX OS v2.6:
https://t.co/MOQEJTBq77
https://t.co/LiE7cdLatJ

 

[linuxares]

So my very own code which helps me decrypt my own stuff is illegal? Interesting.

It aint, he gotten it backwards. It's perfectly legal to do so. Especially in Europe. Might be different in the US. But I digress.

 

[sj33]

Regarding whether or not they're allowed on the site, it's the keys themselves that are copyrighted. Software to derive keys is not in itself illegal, regardless of how those keys are used.

 

[rafaelia]

Just an FYI that this update breaks USB HDD support, we'll prob have to wait for another update to bring back this functionality

 

[gizmomelb]

Dumped from your own console, it'd be perfectly legal. Distributing them on the internet, not so much. Funny how the law works on that end, isn't it.

(That said, even there there's a minor case of hypocricy as there are two homebrew that do hardcode console keys that is linked here, but that's kinda off-topic to this thread plus I don't think anyone has written anything publicly about that yet.)

umm wasn't there a court ruling recently that modding video game consoles was illegal? will need to go search google.. can't recall which country it was. In which case dumping from your own console is illegal also.

 

[wiewiec]

I think (not a lawier) this homebrew and cfw wars it is reverse enginering and it could be known as legal.

 

[Kubas_inko]

umm wasn't there a court ruling recently that modding video game consoles was illegal? will need to go search google.. can't recall which country it was. In which case dumping from your own console is illegal also.

It is illegal in Japan. Otherwise, It is fully legal (if you don't do any illegal stuff obviously).

 

[Meepers55]

I love how this thread turned into a debate over free speech. I get that differing views bother some people, but you could easily ignore those posts to avoid filling the thread with constant bickering. You shouldn't complain about it when you voluntarily responded to them in the first place.

 

[smf]

So my very own code which helps me decrypt my own stuff is illegal? Interesting.

One would assume you have given yourself permission, so no. But if you can prove to a court that you didn't give yourself permission then go ahead and sue yourself. Violating DMCA isn't criminal, so don't expect anyone to help you enforce your case against yourself.

It is illegal in Japan. Otherwise, It is fully legal (if you don't do any illegal stuff obviously).

Slightly more complicated. DMCA violations have exemptions for phones in the US, but not for consoles. DMCA doesn't require you to wait before someone actually does anything illegal, it's only whether it can be used for illegal things. So signature patches certainly are problematic.

 

[Kubas_inko]

One would assume you have given yourself permission, so no. But if you can prove to a court that you didn't give yourself permission then go ahead and sue yourself.

It is my property. And I can do whatever I want with my property.
Show me anywhere, that I can't do whatever I want with my property, as long as I don't share it or use it for malicious actions.

 

[kumikochan]

One would assume you have given yourself permission, so no. But if you can prove to a court that you didn't give yourself permission then go ahead and sue yourself. Violating DMCA isn't criminal, so don't expect anyone to help you enforce your case against yourself.

Due to this i was actually wondering if people do sue themselves because who the fuck would do that but a quick google search and a lot of people do seem to sue themselves. Mindblown

 

[wiewiec]

Are you sure? I have complained that we only can reads "fights" about which FW is better. That's enough for deleting my post?

Off top about fighting with each other is stupid and should be deleted since I know what hard to find solutions for problems with cfw digging with shitpodtes like SX OS threads have. If I will be moderator i will for sure hang on the rope to not read this cat fights and prevent my mental balance. God damn for this threads there is not enough popcorn on the Universe.

 

[gizmomelb]

It is my property. And I can do whatever I want with my property.
Show me anywhere, that I can't do whatever I want with my property, as long as I don't share it or use it for malicious actions.

no, that's the reason there are various court cases being held around the world to decide on consumer rights and ownership or electronic devices - a lot of companies EULAs retain ownership of the software inside electronic devices and disallow modifications by third parties for their own use.

look at some of the big court cases involving servicing farm equipment leading the way on digital ownership.

 

[smf]

It is my property. And I can do whatever I want with my property.
Show me anywhere, that I can't do whatever I want with my property, as long as I don't share it or use it for malicious actions.

You're missing the point.. DMCA makes it illegal to distribute anything that allows copyrightable content to be decrypted without permission.

You are claiming that because it's yours then you have permission, therefore the DMCA doesn't cover it because you have permission.

Permission makes a whole difference to many things.

 

[linuxares]

no, that's the reason there are various court cases being held around the world to decide on consumer rights and ownership or electronic devices - a lot of companies EULAs retain ownership of the software inside electronic devices and disallow modifications by third parties for their own use.

look at some of the big court cases involving servicing farm equipment leading the way on digital ownership.

Remeber now that we talking about different countries. EU have a strong consumer ethic vs the US.

 

[Kubas_inko]

no, that's the reason there are various court cases being held around the world to decide on consumer rights and ownership or electronic devices - a lot of companies EULAs retain ownership of the software inside electronic devices and disallow modifications by third parties for their own use.

look at some of the big court cases involving servicing farm equipment leading the way on digital ownership.

EULA is not a law. Case closed. Unless use it illegally, it is completely legal to do whatever you want with your shit (unless EULA says that they will go to court with you if this and that).
Maybe that in the US, EULA is stronger than law (makes sense considering what Apple has been doing).

 

[gizmomelb]

I love how this thread turned into a debate over free speech. I get that differing views bother some people, but you could easily ignore those posts to avoid filling the thread with constant bickering. You shouldn't complain about it when you voluntarily responded to them in the first place.

because some posters on here ''might'' like to quibble over technicalities and semantics and grasp at any point where they think they can best those that have opposing views to their own.

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

EULA is not a law. Case closed. Unless use it illegally, it is completely legal to do whatever you want with your shit (unless EULA says that they will go to court with you if this and that)-

no it is not law NOW - you missed completely the part where I said there are a number of court cases being held around the world to DECIDE ON THE LAW OF OWNERSHIP OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES AND MODDING.

hopefully you won't miss that.

 

[kumikochan]

EULA is not a law. Case closed. Unless use it illegally, it is completely legal to do whatever you want with your shit (unless EULA says that they will go to court with you if this and that).

Oh please don't bring up that topic again. I'm getting a headache all over again just thinking about that thread. It was around 30 pages just arguing about the EULA wich btw i agree with you but just getting a headache thinking about that again

 

[gizmomelb]

Remeber now that we talking about different countries. EU have a strong consumer ethic vs the US.

yes, which is why I mentioned ''around the world''. I am not American, nor do I live in America.

 

[smf]

Unless use it illegally, it is completely legal to do whatever you want with your shit (unless EULA says that they will go to court with you if this and that).

Right, but if someone tells you how to modify your stuff so it can be used for decrypting copyright content without permission then they are breaking the DMCA/EUCD/whatever.

Selling it after it's modded is also problematic.

They can prevent you from accessing on line services if you break the EULA as well.