If it suggests the Switch 2 will be hacked in the next 30 years, then definitely no.if its on twitter - then probably no.
If it suggests the Switch 2 will be hacked in the next 30 years, then definitely no.if its on twitter - then probably no.
Well, he is right.Chibi is really against the idea the switch 2 will ever be hacked.
The slightest idea of it gives him physical pain![]()
Someone with more knowledge of the switch/2 eco system correct me if im wrong but Apparently the switch 2 uses LPDDR5X memory, and like all consoles now it's shared. Does this mean it wont be compatable?Correct me if this can be possible: With this vulnerability over the GPU https://gddr.fail/. An attack can start over the userland(WebGTK exploit), and with the exploit take over the gpu and cpu, dump the kernel,keys,etc and start investigatiom to find a more "easy" vulnerability to exploit so the full attack chain will be: WebGTK Userland -> GDDR Rowhammer over the GPU -> CPU takeover-> Kernel dump

The switch doesn't use webgtk. You can't run any custom code even in the exploited browser user space, so how do you think your can take over the CPU and GPU from just the browserCorrect me if this can be possible: With this vulnerability over the GPU https://gddr.fail/. An attack can start over the userland(WebGTK exploit), and with the exploit take over the gpu and cpu, dump the kernel,keys,etc and start investigatiom to find a more "easy" vulnerability to exploit so the full attack chain will be: WebGTK Userland -> GDDR Rowhammer over the GPU -> CPU takeover-> Kernel dump

Well, it is unhackable.Why do people want to believe so badly the Switch 2 is unhackable?
Is it because you'd want a hacked Switch 2, and don't want to be disappointed when if it takes a very long time?
Genuinly wondering, what is the point pretending any computer system is unhackable?
Or is the obvious pattern of unhackable devices, that sooner or often, much later, do get hacked really that hard to see?
That's.... kinda really poor logic.Well, it is unhackable.
Is a hack available? No? Then it is unhackable.
That's.... kinda really poor logic.
We didn't notice a hole here, so therefore there isn't any holes, therefore, hole-less.
There's just no known exploits, doesn't mean no exploits.
Then let them loop, you don't have to engage with the thread.This whole thread is pointless. Some people will claim that there might be an exploit, others will say that if there's no proof then there's no exploit, but there might be, but there isn't one right now, but maybe eventually, but... and it just loops back and forth.

I personally do not care if it is unhackable or not, I simply do not want piracy on the system in the first couple of years at least (although ideally until the console stops being supported).Why do people want to believe so badly the Switch 2 is unhackable?
Is it because you'd want a hacked Switch 2, and don't want to be disappointed when if it takes a very long time?
Genuinly wondering, what is the point pretending any computer system is unhackable?
Or is the obvious pattern of unhackable devices, that sooner or often, much later, do get hacked really that hard to see?
Well the first exploit we saw runned arbitrary code in the userland it was not a browser the entry point was the browser. And you only need to make sure that the gpu is used to try hammering the dram and make the bit flips for a cpu take overThe switch doesn't use webgtk. You can't run any custom code even in the exploited browser user space, so how do you think your can take over the CPU and GPU from just the browser

It was in the browser, and it was not running arbitrary code. It used ROP, and was only calling functions already compiled into the browser applet. There's a reason nothing came of it. We want to be able to map memory as executable, but the browser can only map memory as read-writeWell the first exploit we saw runned arbitrary code in the userland it was not a browser the entry point was the browser. And you only need to make sure that the gpu is used to try hammering the dram and make the bit flips for a cpu take over

I accidentally the (w)hole thing!We didn't notice a hole here, so therefore there isn't any holes, therefore, hole-less.
Oh thats sad newsIt was in the browser, and it was not running arbitrary code. It used ROP, and was only calling functions already compiled into the browser applet. There's a reason nothing came of it. We want to be able to map memory as executable, but the browser can only map memory as read-write

Do you know how many console exploits have been written completely with ROP?It was in the browser, and it was not running arbitrary code. It used ROP, and was only calling functions already compiled into the browser applet. There's a reason nothing came of it. We want to be able to map memory as executable, but the browser can only map memory as read-write

you don't write an exploit, you discover them and write hacks using it. And as for what I think your question is, then the answer is 0.Do you know how many console exploits have been written completely with ROP?