
Originally Posted by
tripellex Also, if it comes down to it, I think between myself and Mushy that we may be able to pull what we need. I can practice on some older Atmega16s, then after we get ahold of either a PSJB or X3JB, I can decap it (if there's no security mesh in place), grab some high res die closeups, and send it to Mushy to second opinion it, if he's interested.
I'll stick to the unlooper as my weapon of choice
... But as I wrote...If the challenge/response is static, there is no need for all this

Originally Posted by
GrandpaHomer
Yeah - I'm not really keen to update from 3.15 just to find out this is not exactly what I might have expected ...

Neither am I... And I stopped updating on 3.00 

Originally Posted by
GrandpaHomer
The question is how much is it FW version dependend ... if it's using some routines simply not present in previous versions or if it's just about correct addressing of the code in each version ...
I would bet on both. But then, I haven't been following the whole thing that much since Geohot's hack.
If you look through the exploit in the first packet, there is relative coding like this here:
Code:
3ac: fb 81 00 80 std r28,128(r1)
3b0: fb a1 00 88 std r29,136(r1)
3b4: fb e1 00 98 std r31,152(r1)
3b8: fb 41 00 70 std r26,112(r1)
3bc: fb 61 00 78 std r27,120(r1)
this might be a good thing if we want to adapt this exploit to other FWs.
But then there is also "absolute" coding like this:
Code:
150: 00 04 90 e0 .long 0x490e0
154: e8 82 0f 08 ld r4,3848(r2)
158: 00 04 90 e4 .long 0x490e4
15c: e8 7c 00 20 ld r3,32(r28)
160: 00 04 90 e8 .long 0x490e8
164: f8 64 00 00 std r3,0(r4)
168: 00 04 f0 a8 .long 0x4f0a8
The values after .long are probably addresses which are firmware dependent and would have to be changed depending on the FW version. Again I am guessing here...
Maybe some people with more knowledge of the PS3 internals could help here to analyse the exploit and share the results.
Karl