Parasyte wrote:
Sappharad wrote:
What makes you think that the Wii games are even signed as it is?
Probably this:
http://cryptosystem.org/video/tmbinc-co ... ing2k6.ogmSappharad wrote:
DS games (with the exception of wireless downloads) aren't signed, just part of the binary is encrypted. We know that entire Wii discs are encrypted, but I haven't seen any evidence that shows the actual executable on them is signed.
Actually, we have seen evidence:
http://cryptosystem.org/video/tmbinc-co ... ing2k6.ogmSappharad wrote:
Remember, the GC Action Replay came out long before anyone else had produced tools to run code on the GCN. If encryption is their only obstacle right now, then I see no reason why this wouldn't be feasible.
Too bad encryption is not the only obstacle as explained here:
http://cryptosystem.org/video/tmbinc-co ... ing2k6.ogmWhat evidence? You linked me to the same video 3 times, and it doesn't prove a thing.
The only place in the video where he even talks about the obstacles to running code is the "Why no Wii homebrew?" slide. The third bullet, he says "On the Wii, disc content is encrypted and signed."
That's the only place in the entire video where he mentions it.
How is that evidence? He reads pretty much the same thing from his PowerPoint slide and doesn't back it up with any information. You can easily see the data is encrypted by dumping a disc and looking at it. But I have yet to see evidence from anyone that actually proves that something is signed.
Edit: In fact, there seems to be some weak evidence to the contrary. Why is it possible to brick a Wii by installing a system update from a poorly burned disc? Wouldn't Nintendo want to verify the signature of an update before they even try to apply it to the system? I suppose this differs from a signature of an actual executable, which is why I've already admitted it's pretty weak.