Hacking CONFIRMED: No roadblocks for 7.0.1 Support on SXOS

[blahblah]

Did you reverse the new beta code already? Where can we get more info on this?
Any proof on these claims?

I have not completed a full disassembly, but I have validated the relevant portion. A full disassembly will come from the usual subject, unless I can beat them.

Not sure how I would be able to annotate what I have in a way that users here would understand it. I wouldn't want to until I fully take apart the update and annotate the changes.

 

[SXAintSoBad]

Also going to put in a shout out in Lucius' defence. Reasoned discussions could be had with Lucius. Not so much with the other anti-SX-no-matter-what crowd. The thread did get much more civil to read after I discovered the Ignore option, though.

Learned quite a bit along the way, too.

 

[rrocha]

I have not completed a disassembly, but I have validated the relevant portion. A full disassembly will come from the usual subject, unless I can beat them.

Not sure how I would be able to annotate what I have in a way that users here would understand it.

Try me!
As a side note, I'm pretty sure I'm not the only coder here that has in-depth knowledge about hardware, security and how similar architectures work. I'm yet to go balls-deep into the Switch but a lot of people do know a shitload about the concepts, enough to connect the dots even if they don't know the specific architecture of this console. Just like you don't need to know how Windows kernel implements a certain part of their modules in order to understand it, assuming that you know and studied the core concepts of a unix kernel system, as an example.

 

[blahblah]

Try me!
As a side note, I'm pretty sure I'm not the only coder here that has in-depth knowledge about hardware, security and how similar architectures work. I'm yet to go balls-deep into the Switch but a lot of people do know a shitload about the concepts, enough to connect the dots even if they don't know the specific architecture of this console. Just like you don't need to know how Windows kernel implements a certain part of their modules in order to understand it, assuming that you know and studied the core concepts of a unix kernel system, as an example.

Ah, got you. Give me an hour or so to take apart the update in a more meaningful way. I'd be more willing to explain what I am seeing when I have looked more, unpacked more, am more certain that what I am seeing is what I am seeing.

 

[altorn]

OH SHIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

 

[Legend Of Kay]

@Lacius it is now FACT that SXOS supports 7.0.x
No mights or maybes. Cold hard fact!

 

[altorn]

Reposting cause who reads 36 pages...

In my opinion, TX has four options, but only the first two I can see as viable for them to do.

Viable

• Use sept and admit they use atmosphere based code
• Not use sept and not have 7.0.x+ support

Not Viable

• Get hold of the key to sign sept
• Use a non sept exploit

I posted the reason why I think the latter two aren't viable HERE, I also explained to the best of my knowledge what happened to get to this current point in exploits here

So what option do you think TX used for SX2.6?

 

[xiaNaix]

@Lacius it is now FACT that SXOS supports 7.0.x
No mights or maybes. Cold hard fact!

The betting life is hard. Sometimes you lose.

 

[JoeBloggs777]

he never said that

grow up, dude

I'ts a bit of friendly banter, i don't think you'll find I've ever been dis-respectful to him or anyone (well hardly anyone on here)

I was prepared to say i was wrong about the update, at the end of the day it's just a console

 

[ZachyCatGames]

They're using exosphere now, which somewhat points towards them using a modified version of sept

 

[Lacius]

@Lacius it is now FACT that SXOS supports 7.0.x
No mights or maybes. Cold hard fact!

The betting life is hard. Sometimes you lose.

Did you guys forget that I said TX would probably release an update supporting 7.0.x?

 

[Deleted User]

They're using exosphere now, which somewhat points towards them using a modified version of sept

And external drive support seems to be broken, lots of good those 50 days went to getting all their features working
Inb4; but it's only a beta!

 

[comput3rus3r]

This thread should now be renamed "TX HATER WALL OF SHAME" rofl.

 

[tomazzzi]

so now where are the haters ?

stupid kids...

 

[TheZander]

so now where are the haters ?

stupid kids...

They didn't go anywhere, just got to switch gears. Wait for the tear down. There's something worth hating i bet.

 

[xiaNaix]

so now where are the haters ?

stupid kids...

They are in the main news thread whining as usual and frantically trying to figure out how TX has done this.

 

[Lacius]

We know everyone has been eagerly anticipating support for firmware 7.x, some, Lacius said it would never come.. but the wait is now over!

Sorry Lacius

I never said that. Reread my posts. I said 7.0.x support was probably coming. Grow up.

 

[JoeBloggs777]

I never said that. Reread my posts. I said 7.0.x support was probably coming. Grow up.

There's reason to think TX might have silently stopped supporting SX OS

https://gbatemp.net/threads/can-i-b...rom-sd-card-via-sxloader.533264/#post-8545694

 

[Lacius]

There's reason to think TX might have silently stopped supporting SX OS

https://gbatemp.net/threads/can-i-b...rom-sd-card-via-sxloader.533264/#post-8545694

Might have. Also:

I think it's more likely than not that TX is going to come out with something for 7.0.x.

You also already apologized for the lie via private message.

 

[JoeBloggs777]

Might have. Also:

You also already apologized for the lie via private message.

oh dear, which came first ? , you changed your tune when you saw some info from TX and also the post from Json and he was spot on, no Atmos splash screen.