Does this algorythm thing?

[Raheemiscool]

Mean that the scene is effectively dead forever?

[Mathematician]

You probably read the sticky and was misguided on what it meant.

No it does not.

[Raheemiscool]

You probably read the sticky and was misguided on what it meant.

No it does not.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Mathematician]

To be a bit more clearer, being able to run unsigned code on 3.56+ firmwares may as well be impossible. It's not impossible, but either the firmware contents must be decrypted and be able to me modified or we have to crack an ECDSA algorithms (which is not impossible to crack but may as well be with current knowledge of humans).

The other alternative if someone like Trublue can somehow run 3.56+ objects on 3.55 firmware whether somehow porting future firmware guts to 3.55 by means of debug eboots or however they do it.

[real2k]

To be a bit more clearer, being able to run unsigned code on 3.56+ firmwares may as well be impossible. It's not impossible, but either the firmware contents must be decrypted and be able to me modified or we have to crack an ECDSA algorithms (which is not impossible to crack but may as well be with current knowledge of humans).

The other alternative if someone like Trublue can somehow run 3.56+ objects on 3.55 firmware whether somehow porting future firmware guts to 3.55 by means of debug eboots or however they do it.

Seems like KaKaRoTo was saying the "random" part of the algorithm code where it grabs 20 or 40 bytes of code to verify, is whats making it imposible to lock onto paterns to crack it... "To Bad There Wasnt a Way to Infect The C Language or whutever" so the "Random" Part would give the same bytes to verify everytime... Uknow like change the laws of the language for "Random" just to get the same paterns... just think out loud.

Long Time Fan First Time Poster.

[Mathematician]

Seems like KaKaRoTo was saying the "random" part of the algorithm code where it grabs 20 or 40 bytes of code to verify, is whats making it imposible to lock onto paterns to crack it... "To Bad There Wasnt a Way to Infect The C Language or whutever" so the "Random" Part would give the same bytes to verify everytime... Uknow like change the laws of the language for "Random" just to get the same paterns... just think out loud.

Long Time Fan First Time Poster.

Well they always draw the random number from some source. I was working on SAS project at a friends house who had a cracked version of SAS. the way the cracked version of SAS works is it tricks SAS in thinking it's on a very specific time. So when it randomly generated numbers, I realized that my experiments were generating the same trajectory (and the trajectory was composed of a 1,000,000 random numbers).

It's possible if you can find the source of the random numbers it's possible to manipulate it.