Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

icode4.coffee

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 109 posts

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#81

Post by perching_aix »

hot_gril wrote: post #76
perching_aix wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you be a bit more specific regarding that CPU? That's a very wide range.

i5-9400f, and I was wrong about GPU, it's 1660ti

It's really surprising then that you had such a bad experience with PS3 emulation specifically at least, the i5 9400F was a go-to recommendation there for a very long time, basically ever since that processor's release (6 years ago).

It was in last August they bumped their system requirements to the i5 10400F. Nearly all of the games marked "Playable" in their compatibility list should be plug-and-play territory, with mint performance.

What were the games you tested with classified as? Did you try to seek help on their community space(s)?

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#82

Post by ghusbands »

hart_russell wrote: post #53
throwaway48476 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RIP Felix has a much better video that explains the cause of the failure. Factory stress isn't the cause. It was a bad design.

You misread, that's not what I wrote.

You wrote "He suggests that all of the fat models will eventually red ring due to being stress tested at the factory" - it directly states that stress testing at the factory is the claimed reason that the fat models will red ring. Or was the video host somehow stress tested at a factory?

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#83

Post by KeplerBoy »

mschuster91 wrote: post #25
KeplerBoy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to emulate a current console, try emulating the switch. I haven't looked into it much, but apparently it works better on modern hardware than on the switch itself. Not surprising given the switch aging hardware and power limit.

The Switch is a mainstream-ish ARM system. IIRC it maps really well to Apple's M system.

yes, I guess running switch games on android is like running x86 windows games on x86 linux using wine.

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#84

Post by nolok »

hot_gril wrote: post #50
mschuster91 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm European, I actually support RoHS - it was just the original cause because everyone up to it getting in force was accustomed to classic, decades-proven leaded solder.

Did they need to have a longer transition period? Looks like it went into enforcement only 2 or 3 years after it was approved.

It was not so much a "not enough time to transition" and more like "there is no consequences yet so why bother OH DAMN WE NEED TO MAKE IT TODAY IT GOES INTO FORCE".

Many had no issues, but a few companies didn't bother to do their homework, problem would have been the same if the period was twice as long.

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#85

Post by iforgotpassword »

rekoil wrote: post #79
trashface wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PS3 was wacky, but the 360 wasn't that different from a PC at the time. There were some differences in rendering API, it had a few features not available on PC hardware. And the CPU cores were actually slower than an equivalent intel, but you had 6 of them, rare for the time. If your game was relatively portable and already used a API relatively close to D3D, it wasn't too hard to bring it up on the 360. I worked on…

Xbox 360 is also a PowerPC architecture, which on its own makes it quite a bit different from normal PC hardware, and even if that's a target that's more common to emulate there's still heavy performance losses in doing so. It might have been easier to port to because of good OS design, but running games for it will still be inefficient compared to running on actual hardware.

360 emulation was already quite good a year ago, now there's even an experimental fork of xenon that does recompilation for even more performance.

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#86

Post by perching_aix »

NegativeLatency wrote: post #63
mouse_ wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xbox 360 emulation is still really bad for most games, despite what some YouTubers would have you believe. But let's say in a few years it does become substantially better. There's still: • Nostalgia • Authenticity • Compatibility • Preservation • Cost of entry Even if 360 emulation does become practical, a 360 will still be cheaper than any gaming PC capable of playing those games.

I also find it much less drama to sit down on the couch and fire up a console, than to have to: - startup PC - update PC - figure out why bluetooth controller won't pair to PC - finally get it working, and then have a game crash on you

Considering that the constant stream of system software and game updates became a thing exactly in the 7th console generation (x360 era), updates are a pretty funny thing to bring up in a comparison like this.

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#87

Post by maximilianburke »

trashface wrote: post #67
jcranmer wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Xbox 360/PS3 era of video game consoles is probably the hardest era to emulate. Subsequent generations of consoles are essentially the same hardware as regular computers, just with a custom OS (and known hardware profile, certainly a benefit over regular consumer PCs). But that era of video game consoles is the last gasp of the custom hardware design of earlier consoles, which is substantially harder to emulate b…

PS3 was wacky, but the 360 wasn't that different from a PC at the time. There were some differences in rendering API, it had a few features not available on PC hardware. And the CPU cores were actually slower than an equivalent intel, but you had 6 of them, rare for the time. If your game was relatively portable and already used a API relatively close to D3D, it wasn't too hard to bring it up on the 360. I worked on…

The 360 had three hyperthreaded cores, not six.

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#88

Post by PaulHoule »

rickdeckard wrote: post #80
trashface wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PS3 was wacky, but the 360 wasn't that different from a PC at the time. There were some differences in rendering API, it had a few features not available on PC hardware. And the CPU cores were actually slower than an equivalent intel, but you had 6 of them, rare for the time. If your game was relatively portable and already used a API relatively close to D3D, it wasn't too hard to bring it up on the 360. I worked on…

Regardless of the D3D-like API-layer (which helped Microsoft compensate for the peculiarities of PowerPC), they're both PowerPC architectures. You apparently don't know the Story how Sony spent big R&D-money with IBM to transition from MIPS to the custom PowerPC Cell Architecture, while IBM was already selling parts of this development to Microsoft for Xbox 360, and Microsoft ultimately beating Sony in market-launch…

Nintendo also used PowerPC for GameCube, Wii and Wii U.

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#89

Post by kmeisthax »

karlgkk wrote: post #72
kmeisthax wrote: post #43

I'm gonna be honest, I thought the story was over when they started talking about "oh hey here's this hypervisor code that loads extensions", because obviously extensions are going to be a massive increase in attack surface. But even then, the system wasn't actually broken by the extension being badly designed; the extension was just the most useful target to use the actual attack on. How the hell has this the Xbox 3…

Part of the reason is motivation - if you hack a console, you can make a fair money, by selling your exploit as a package piece of software. Much like modchip vendors do. In fact, there have been a few software exploits that were sold with ties to a specific console. Funny if you think about it - If you hack an iPhone, you can sell your exploit to many governments and government agencies for millions of dollars If i…

That is true today, but back in 2005 when the Xbox 360 launched we didn't have every government buying up security vulnerabilities by the truckload. The market for zero-days didn't really get established until the early 2010s when the 360 was on its way out. Every contemporary competitor to the Xbox 360 got hacked within its commercial lifespan, due to having comically awful security practices. Microsoft certainly was, at the time, 'better' than Sony or Nintendo; but the task they were doing was just plain impossible.

A game console is, effectively, a Point of Presence[0] for a DRM vendor. It's job is to tie the owner's hands so that they don't copy games, and that they don't buy games from competing companies. This is an incredibly difficult, if not impossible task. In contrast, while the iPhone's security also does DRM and developer lockout; their main concern is keeping you from getting hacked by nation states. Those are certainly more sophisticated and well-financed attackers; but they (usually) don't have physical access to or ownership over what you're trying to protect.

[0] In telecom, a PoP is the dividing line between your systems and someone else's. If that sounds really arbitrary, it's because that's how they untangled the Bell monopoly.

Re: Hacking the Xbox 360 Hypervisor Part 2: The Bad Update Exploit

#90

Post by devmor »

vekatimest wrote: post #59
com2kid wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Xbox 360 and PS3 emulators are still borderline unusable on my new-ish PC. This is unfortunate as a decade ago Microsoft had an internal emulator for Xbox 360 that ran at near native speed. I am curious if that emulator is what it used to play Xbox360 games on newer x64 based Xbox models, or if they are using a different code base. Either way, technically it is possible for the experience to be good!

I think the 360 backwards compatibility is a mix of emulation and certain parts being disassembled & recompiled for x86 with some black magic. edit: Here's an interview with platform lead Bill Stillwell that goes into a lot more detail https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2017-xbox-one-x-bac...

I believe there is actually a recent userland project that disassembles and recompiles 360 games for x86...
Post reply on HN