Hacking Is 7.00 fully decrypted?

rrdein

Active Member
OP
Newcomer
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
28
Trophies
0
Age
44
XP
163
Country
United States
Saw recently that this was fully decrypted. Is that accurate, and if so where does that place the odds of a 7.00 exploit happening in the near future? I'm wondering if it's time for me to buy a 7.00 console?
 

godreborn

Welcome to the Machine
Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
33,214
Trophies
2
XP
22,326
Country
United States
not sure if it's decryptable, but the problem is for a locked down system to accept those changes when trying to install it. afaik, the problem is no userland exploit. 5.55 was decrypted as well, yet we're still stuck on 5.05.
 

MostlyUnharmful

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
410
Trophies
0
Age
41
XP
1,433
Country
Italy
Saw recently that this was fully decrypted. Is that accurate, and if so where does that place the odds of a 7.00 exploit happening in the near future?
Allegedly it was decrypted, what is debatable is the way that was done. From what I know, and I could be way wrong, to dump the kernel from memory you need elevated privileges from userland, so this would suggest that at least one individual was able to gain root on 7.00, maybe it's the same single exploit chain hinted for 5.55, maybe there are more than one.

On the other hand, someone could have found a way to decrypt firmware using an exploited 5.50 console, in a similar way that games are decrypted.

So what are the odds of a 7.00 jailbreak public release in the near future? IMHO nothing has changed, unless a bootrom compromise is found Sony could regain control with minimum effort and that would mean burning a valuable zero day, so it's plausible that nothing will emerge until this generation reach end of life or maybe later, I suspect our individual would be sure that current exploit can't be leveraged on next generation before wasting it.

But if you consider it in the scale of the universe that would mean real soon if you could hold your breath for a few million years. ^__~
 

johnma2

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2018
Messages
132
Trophies
0
XP
104
Country
United States
You serious? Geohotz in return of Sony dropping the lawsuit opened against him, he pleaded to not touch a Sony gadget ever, so consider him retired, for good.

It's kind of ironic though because he had the advantage. If he just used the argument, "It's not your code, it's mine." he would've won. It's actually why Nintendo hasn't filed any lawsuits against those with CFW. They can't, because it's not their software or the code that's creating it. Also why Google hasn't intervened in the whole rooted phones gig. They can't, although Android is open source anyways so it doesn't really matter.
 

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,180
Trophies
1
XP
4,956
Country
United Kingdom
If he just used the argument, "It's not your code, it's mine." he would've won.

He broke the DMCA, he couldn't win. Not only that he distributed a modified version of a PUP & you need Sony's permission to do that.

It's actually why Nintendo hasn't filed any lawsuits against those with CFW.

Nintendo have filed lawsuits against TX, Nintendo won. You can't access their web site in the UK for example.

With atmosphere it's slightly more complicated because it's not entirely clear if it violates the DMCA or not. I believe gbatemp violates the DMCA with the sweet patches thread (as does anyone that bundles patches like Kosmos or ReiNX).
 
Last edited by smf,

johnma2

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2018
Messages
132
Trophies
0
XP
104
Country
United States
He broke the DMCA, he couldn't win. Not only that he distributed a modified version of a PUP & you need Sony's permission to do that.



Nintendo have filed lawsuits against TX, Nintendo won. You can't access their web site in the UK for example.

With atmosphere it's slightly more complicated because it's not entirely clear if it violates the DMCA or not. I believe gbatemp violates the DMCA with the sweet patches thread (as does anyone that bundles patches like Kosmos or ReiNX).

Well, I guess it makes sense when you put it that way. Kind of a bummer then, but Nintendo hasn't won any lawsuits when it comes to plailect or even Datel, and both use code that Nintendo does not own.
 

Demix

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
203
Trophies
0
Age
30
XP
897
Country
United States
I thought the dmca protected from copycats if some one wanted to make like play box 4. Why would he need sonys permission for a modified pup when if he becomes legal owner of counsel. It would say in booklet dont modify system, but he could hydrolic press his ps4 and put on youtube
 

tech3475

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Messages
3,002
Trophies
1
XP
4,217
Country
I thought the dmca protected from copycats if some one wanted to make like play box 4. Why would he need sonys permission for a modified pup when if he becomes legal owner of counsel. It would say in booklet dont modify system, but he could hydrolic press his ps4 and put on youtube

You're thinking of trademark law.

The DMCA is more about preventing DRM being broken (exceptions aside) and online copyright infringement.
 

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,180
Trophies
1
XP
4,956
Country
United Kingdom
Why would he need sonys permission for a modified pup when if he becomes legal owner of counsel.

That is like saying that because you are the legal owner of a dvd player then you're legally allowed to copy all dvd's. The PUP is copyrighted content for the PS3, you don't own it & can't legally distribute modified versions. If you want to modify it on your own for personal use and not distribute the result then sure go ahead. Even if they found out about it, then you haven't distributed anything copyrighted. The simplest way round that would be distributing an IPS patch, but that IPS patch would still violate the DMCA, EUCD, etc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-circumvention

The reason that people still get away with it is more because it's been proved that suing individual people hacking for free has proved to not be effective. George Hotz was taunting them using his real name at a time where they hadn't figured that out.

Trying to interfere with commercial sale is much easier for various reasons. They know that people will find a way round the law, but it's meant to slow them down.

Also why Google hasn't intervened in the whole rooted phones gig.

Isn't that because rooting your android phone doesn't enable piracy? There isn't really any DRM in android phones.

It's kinda hard to lock down an operating system that everyone has the source code to.
 
Last edited by smf,

johnma2

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2018
Messages
132
Trophies
0
XP
104
Country
United States
Isn't that because rooting your android phone doesn't enable piracy? There isn't really any DRM in android phones.

It's kinda hard to lock down an operating system that everyone has the source code to.

It's not that it doesn't enable piracy, it's more like it's not their code that creates the rooted environment. Can't sue someone if it's not your code being used.
 
Last edited by johnma2,

Demix

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
203
Trophies
0
Age
30
XP
897
Country
United States
It's not that it doesn't enable piracy, it's more like it's not their code that creates the rooted environment. Can't sue someone if it's not your code being used.
Like henry ford was the orginal car maker? And each other car after is a different code
 

johnma2

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2018
Messages
132
Trophies
0
XP
104
Country
United States
Like henry ford was the orginal car maker? And each other car after is a different code

Pretty much yeah. No auto dealer can reject your car if you're trying to sell it when you've replaced any part(s) that are not from the factory itself. Ford can't sue you for it either.
 

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,180
Trophies
1
XP
4,956
Country
United Kingdom
It's not that it doesn't enable piracy, it's more like it's not their code that creates the rooted environment. Can't sue someone if it's not your code being used.

Yes, you can. I think you need to read up on what the DMCA/EUCD (basically any WIPO country has similar rules) does.

You can break those laws without making any code changes, all you have to do is tell people how to work round DRM and you've broken the law.
 
Last edited by smf,

Demix

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
203
Trophies
0
Age
30
XP
897
Country
United States
Yes, you can. I think you need to read up on what the DMCA/EUCD (basically any WIPO country has similar rules) does.

You can break those laws without making any code changes, all you have to do is tell people how to work round DRM and you've broken the law.
Not to go more off topic but thats bs. Apple is doing same thing to 3rd party battery repairs where they put a chip on a battery that is nonremovable and just putting a new battery without apple will make the battery error message appear. So apple is forcing 80 dollar or more battery repair since they cant sue the 3rd party repair service. As the saying goes anything thats connected to the internet except it to be hackable
 

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,180
Trophies
1
XP
4,956
Country
United Kingdom
Not to go more off topic but thats bs.

A battery replacement is not equivalent to enabling pirated content being played on consoles.

Besides, the US courts have decided that DMCA doesn't prevent jailbreaking phones but does prevent jailbreaking consoles (but weirdly does still cover tablets).

Maybe you should do some basic research?
 
Last edited by smf,

johnma2

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2018
Messages
132
Trophies
0
XP
104
Country
United States
A battery replacement is not equivalent to enabling pirated content being played on consoles.

Besides, the US courts have decided that DMCA doesn't prevent jailbreaking phones but does prevent jailbreaking consoles (but weirdly does still cover tablets).

Maybe you should do some basic research?

I did go through enough of the DMCA earlier today. It still doesn't prevent users from jailbreaking consoles. It only allows vendors like Apple or Sony to sue if someone is distributing their code which is ironic because Sony distributes their code anyway. However what Geo was doing wasn't technically distributing their code since he was using a modified version. The Playstation update scheme only works a certain way, and all Geo was doing was exploiting that. But it doesn't really matter in the long run because there's no use dwelling on the past. Actually, battery replacements do have a point being here because it's similar to the "Do Not Remove, Warranty is Void" stickers that used to be on our consoles. The FTC will catch on sooner and send a cease-and-desist order to Apple when they find out.
 
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    KenniesNewName @ KenniesNewName: https://youtube.com/shorts/0PLynroGlRs?feature=share