Print

[InterestedHacker]

QUOTE(PS2MXBOX @ Dec 13 2005, 08:18 PM)

this will be my last post in this thread, but why cant we log the data off the dev kit processor and put that in a chip?

As far as I know, the dev kit doesn't have any signatures.  You can't run signed code on one!  Therefore the dev kit is damn near useless.

[crosseye]

can we stop this nonsense crap about a demo game being used for at least right now. The problem still remains, the actual GAME has a media check that will run. If you try to mess with the media check, you lose the signature. Either way, using a demo as a disguise, doesn't matter. When the actual game goes to load, you have your problem. SO, can we stop with this nonsense.
IF M$ were so da**n dumb to actually not have this covered, that would be the biggest blunder of theirs in sometime. However, trying to run the game from burned media still raises the flag regardless of having a stupid demo. Let's get this through...THE DEMO IS A DIFFERENT ITEM! It's like having a multi-game disc for the original xbox. Each game was it's own. EACH TIME you tried to go from one game to the other, a media check would be performed. GOT IT.

[snakejoe]

QUOTE(RocketMBA @ Dec 16 2005, 11:46 AM)

You know, it's a lot easier to just ban the idiots rather than attempt giving them knowledge.

I agree.  

[crosseye]

yeah, I'm shaking in my freakin boots.   Bunny understands the concept behind media checks and signatures, so he would not be so flippin dumb as to even think that would work. The ONLY way this had a hope in hell is if M$ made the absolute WORST mistake in their lives.  I mean, you thought the 3 errors in 512 was a serious mistake.

[lordvader129]

QUOTE(DracoYeager @ Dec 16 2005, 10:22 AM)

but then you MAY just alienate someone that could have down the line help the scene in some FABULOUS way.... with a bit of knowledge.... but you may not, so the risk is up to the mods. this guy could be some super hard-core cracker just getting into THIS scene... fuck it could be bunny undercover(now i got ya scared because you now think  "F**K i just pissed off bunny, now nothing will evar get dun1!!1!!1!!!!eleventyone")

anyone with a littl eknowledge in any type of program shoudl quickly grasp the concept of a media check, and understand that loading one executable from another executable isnt going to alter the code of the second executable in any way

bunnie undercover? dont make me laugh, but if for some reason bunnie decides to be a dipshit like this, well then we will just hack 360 without him  

[Monoxboogie]

QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Dec 16 2005, 08:10 PM)

anyone with a littl eknowledge in any type of program shoudl quickly grasp the concept of a media check, and understand that loading one executable from another executable isnt going to alter the code of the second executable in any way

bunnie undercover? dont make me laugh, but if for some reason bunnie decides to be a dipshit like this, well then we will just hack 360 without him  

Although I understand the concept of the media check, and accept that the 360 demo disc piracy thing is a load of crap, we really don't know chain of execution.

BELOW IS WILD SPECULATION BASED ON VERY LITTLE, IF ANY FACT.  DO NOT TAKE IT AS GOLD.  DO NOT PASS GO.  DO NOT COLLECT $200.


Allow me to play the other side for a minute.  I believe it was said somewhere that the Xbox 360 is capable of multitasking in that it can run (at least) two .xex files at the same time.  We, however, currently lack an understanding of the method by which this is done...is it done as a fork() style command?  Does the hypervisor create another virtual machine to run it under?  Some odd option number three?  We simply don't know yet.  *IF* it is fork style, and *IF* MS coded it poorly, and chose to pass down signature validity and media check the child processes (which *could* be the case...if multiple .xex files are packaged within a single release, it is conceivable [though not likely] that they could do this, to minimize the need to get each .xex signed for the single release), then there's a glimmer of hope.  Now, this is a very long shot, I'll admit it.  MS had many eyes going over the development of the 360.  But let's not forget that the "most secure version of Windows ever" (Server 2003) was rooted by RPC DCOM only a few weeks after being rolled out.

THE ABOVE WAS WILD SPECULATION BASED ON VERY LITTLE, IF ANY FACT.  DO NOT TAKE IT AS GOLD.  DO NOT PASS GO.  DO NOT COLLECT $200.

That being said, I personally don't believe that the demo does fork in such a way.  It would be a large mistake on the part of MS.  Not that they've never made a mistake or anything...that'd just be quite a large one to make.