which is what we have since gatewayI wasn't talking about that. Replacing the home menu would also require signature patches.
which is what we have since gatewayI wasn't talking about that. Replacing the home menu would also require signature patches.
Gateway can't replace the home menu on NAND. My point is that we could possibly no longer require a third party mechanism in order to install modified titles to NAND.which is what we have since gateway
what the fuckGateway can't replace the home menu on NAND. My point is that we could possibly no longer require a third party mechanism in order to install modified titles to NAND.
It's an ARM9 binary that loads the CTCert and DeviceID into the ITCM (ARM9 RAM) of a banned console in order to ban it. This doesn't totally make the source system useless, but it definitely means that they can't both go online together.So what is this UnbanMii you speak of and how does it work?
*facepalm* You seem to have a problem with comprehension.what the fuck
and we already kind of do, wtf do you think Luma does already
it's possible without sighax, please learn wtf you are talking about before saying so much shit omg
Basically this. It's all stuff not available to the normal user. Even people with A9LH are just meh.how i feel about this thread right now
Could the CtCert be taken from another console, say a Wii or WiiU?It's an ARM9 binary that loads the CTCert and DeviceID into the ITCM (ARM9 RAM) of a banned console in order to ban it. This doesn't totally make the source system useless, but it definitely means that they can't both go online together.
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
*facepalm* You seem to have a problem with comprehension.
Actually, THAT would be a custom firmware. Luma, Corbenik, etc. are not CFWs, though that is the most used term. They just patch things and then boot.Exactly, which is why nobody has released it. In a moralistic sense, nobody wants to sacrifice a system, especially if they don't own it.
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
If we had the ability to sign everything ourselves (which would be a tedious process), then what would be the need for a custom firmware in that regard?
no one is gonna bruteforce an hash for a patched firmware though. however there will definitely be some kind of payload chainloader i assume.Actually, THAT would be a custom firmware. Luma, Corbenik, etc. are not CFWs, though that is the most used term. They just patch things and then boot.
Sent from my cave of despair where I collect souls
We don't know. We don't have the resources to test this, but it'd most likely cause bigger issues with NIM.Could the CtCert be taken from another console, say a Wii or WiiU?
I know, and I was gonna edit my post because this is a really semantic thing, but I got caught up in replies.Actually, THAT would be a custom firmware. Luma, Corbenik, etc. are not CFWs, though that is the most used term. They just patch things and then boot.
Sent from my cave of despair where I collect souls
It'd be cool, though. Payload chainloader.... I suppose a replacement for A9LH?no one is gonna bruteforce an hash for a patched firmware though. however there will definitely be some kind of payload chainloader i assume.
not that cool. because you'd have to update it manually all the time before updating and stuff.It'd be cool, though. Payload chainloader.... I suppose a replacement for A9LH?
Sent from my cave of despair where I collect souls
I mean, it'd be cool to just say "it is possible and has been done".not that cool. because you'd have to update it manually all the time before updating and stuff.
and pretty much.
Yeah, but this has always been the case with everything; even Android requires user flashed items to be reflashed after a ROM update. This would honestly be no different than the PSP other than the user being required to replace their custom titles with the stock ones in order to properly receive OTA updates.not that cool. because you'd have to update it manually all the time before updating and stuff.
and pretty much.
Depending on the sighax bug, it might be possible that the one "signature" will be universal for any custom firmware binary, due to the fact as the 33c3 talk explained, the pointer is being set to the fixed address of the calculated SHA256 hash. If this address is in fact the same, regardless of the firmware binary being loaded, then that sighax signature will work for pretty much anything.