- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 20
- 威望
- 0 点
- 积分
- 20 点
- 种子
- 0 点
- 注册时间
- 2010-10-15
- 最后登录
- 2020-1-11
|
Hermes 终于回应了Kakaroto's的长篇大论关于他的payload工作
转自部分翻译：
原文是西班牙文，翻译成了英文
Hermes：
我想提醒你的是，这里的主线是 PAYLOAD 的开发，所以没有去适应不同的系统，
那样子的会占用他们各自的thread 。
另一方面，这个payload和Kakarot的是不同的...
我为什么不把这个项目放到github上面呢？
有很多的理由：
第一，它出来的时候，psgroove的payload也不是公开的（至少我没有看到过源代码），
而且 它有一些限制就是，他没能够加载游戏。
所以，我放出了port1_config_descriptor 和汇编码，
在ps3wiki.lan.st 的注释的帮助下，还有AerialX的贡献使得管理游戏不用引导盘。
因为原始的作者是部分来自于被称作 "psjailbreak”的。
从我的观点来看，这个payload的代码是属于某些匿名人士的，有着版权纠纷，
它也属于那些帮助改进但是也是业余爱好者的程序员（当然是非营利的）。
所以我不能，也不应该把版权放上去，但是我去改进它是感觉非常自由的。
为什么不支持其他版本的固件？
这里有两个理由：
1.我只有一台3.41版本的ps3.
2.我认为在之前版本上面做工作是个错误。。。。会多出10倍的错误产出。
我知道有些人这么做是为了linux之类的，在我看来，你不能够拥有所有东西。
那是一个不合逻辑的态度去弄比如3.15版，在有些游戏需要3.42版本的时候。
而且看起来更加合乎逻辑去向前看，
集中精神在到底对3.41firmware（这个一个标准）做了什么或者其他。
英文原文：
Hermes finally replies back to Kakaroto's long winded blog post regarding his payload work!
From the Spanish Forum Elotrolado
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermes via Google Translator
Good.
I remind you that this is a thread PAYLOAD DEVELOPMENT and not make adjustments to it to different systems, that must be occupied other in their respective threads.
On the other hand, this payload is not the same as that used Kakarot, which, if you are inserting hex and you do funny things, do not be surprised and what is required is for someone to compile and hang it in your thread concerned.
That said, happened to handle other issues I've seen out there
Why do not you upload the project to github?
For many reasons:
First, it was born because the payload of psgroove was not public (or at least I did not see the source code) and that individuals were limited to work in the payload without the ability to load games. So I poured port1_config_descriptor and disassembly, helped by the comments in ps3wiki.lan.st on the payload and AerialX contribution that ends up in charge of some games without disk.
The idea was to have a source that could build and improve, without restrictions of moral or legal to affect other people, we posed a hindrance to those who think differently or do not have such restrictions and would like to make our contribution sand.
On the other hand, do not think it's fair (or as we say in plan colleague: "legal") add a parallel psgroove github, when the original authors already have it that way, or think it is fair to add my copyright as author a payload that is not mine, since the original authors are part of what is known as "psjailbreak." From my point of view, the payload code belongs to some anonymous gentlemen with a copyright doubtful, but still belongs to them and I help with some improvements as a user and hobbyist programmer (non-profit course), simply. And therefore I can not (or should not) add copyright, but I feel very free to add improvements.
If others want to, and even change the code to have the excuse to do so, it is their right, but I think you can not foul the GPL for example, by replacing the code with a license and payload which is not well put a "Copyright Hermes", unless the original team does, and that allows me to be co-authored with my changes. Not if the original authors will like the idea that other hand metamos your code, but it's not like they have been very respectful and legal and at least I bring improvements and I take it, just from other code without .
I also think the scene should be a collective effort, not group, when a group is formed, this implies a restriction on the participation of other users and a constraint on development.
For example, suppose that tomorrow I hang the project on github. Who can raise their contributions?. I give only to those who leave and since I administer, all those ideas that do not marry my philosophy, and ultimately could be added would be in the same
A clear example is the following: I have a work philosophy that Kakarot for example, does not share do you think we can cooperate in this regard?. I think it's an emphatic no, he can include what you like about my code and I can include what I like hers, but both follow different paths and have conflicting ideas. Therefore the github not work.
So simple. Rar all-inclusive seems to me a very good solution to facilitate the development and portability of the payload to certain people, of course, can make your patches or changed sources, and even follow his own path in some respects. The github would be nice if this really was open source friendly and had a willingness to work all in the same direction and this had an inordinate size, but here at the moment, have not even been input to the payload beyond adding a few "pokes" for games and have a. S that is less than 25KB uncompressed, I do not think that is big problem
Why not support other versions of firmware?
There are two reasons: first, that I have only a PS3 and has the 3.41 firmware. The second is that I think is a mistake to work on past versions, since they offer less compatibility with games, the more diffi***y to find patches and in the end, only serves to multiply the work x 10 to get worse outcome.
I know some do it to keep Linux, etc, but in life you can not have everything and in my opinion, is an illogical attitude to work for example, to 3.15, when there are games that we call for 3.42 and it seems more logical to move forward and focus on knowing what he's doing the 3.41 firmware (which is standard) than anything else.
peek / poke, syscall syscall 36 and 8
Explain to these high need for these syscalls, almost seems to me perogruyo: my frankly, the syscalls to peek and poke do not like, because only move data of 8 bytes and are very simplistic, frankly. But, although I have a better solution (memcpy by syscall8) the golden rule must have for any developer, is the backwards compatibility where possible. Also poke and peek lv2 windows are used by some and it seems a bit stupid limit.
For this reason the 36 syscall should not be deleted, as manager open while the other lets you switch easily, we are passing the buck to those who develop the program, which will have to deal with those who can not change the syscall 36 (which psjailbrak have, for example) and limit ourselves in the event that this team take something that we can harness all.
The syscall 8 is a very useful toolbox. Despite the opinion of some, I think it is so diffi*** to understand that it is essentially a switch / case that joins other functions to that syscall and syscall8.h enough explanation of its operation, except that anyone can ask about it here they do not bite .
The syscall 8 as I explained at the time, lets you copy, fill with zeros, perform routines in the kernel or even redirect devices and files using a data structure, as explained in syscall8.h
But has three interesting features: a mode allows us to determine that this is the access permissions and the other two allow us to disable or enable the use of syscalls we use.
So syscall8_disable (key), allows applications to hide poke / peek / syscall 36 syscall itself even that only works 8 syscall8_enable expecting a (key) right.
The 64-bit key is used to enable only possible syscalls again with the correct key and thus prevent an application or game, brute force, be easy to draw the correct key, as it also limits the number of retries.
It seems to me a hell of solution to avoid dangerous situations of syscalls applications that allow access to LV2 is a shame that some people seem to not understand the use that have these functions and that the only rule out that no I have written a book with the functions in assembler to say that even a neophyte like me ppc assembler, I would understand (and more relying on the description in syscall8 on its operation).
Why stay in 0x7ff000 the payload? Is not it dangerous?
I'm staying there because we do not have space to store the code. So we have two options: either modify the code to fit in its original place, depriving us of potential or stayed elsewhere that does not seem to bother, because the code is just as LV2 2 MB before to house the payload.
Dangerous is everything in life and if someone appeals to a game back of the payload crashes, perhaps due to reasons other than to house the code in one place in all the dumps I've done, is occupied by zeros (if seen otherwise, there would not have chosen to include the code)
And I am not of those who do things without most, if not quite the soil tested and go into games and go out and relaunch others eye. And the truth is that since I use open manager (the original, not those who are using you who do not have source code and include the same crap that alter something, just the option to turn on / off key), with all OMANXXXXX folder games, I had no crashes rare, except in games that require hard, if not entered, as is obvious.
Obviously, I have all games on the market and I can not tell if there are exceptions that break the rule, but most likely a game pete for anything other than the position of the payload in the kernel.
Greetings
News Source: PSGroove Custom Payload's
google翻译：
最初发布者爱马仕通过谷歌翻译
好。
我要提醒你，这是一个线程有效载荷发展，而不是对其进行调整，以不同的系统，必须在各自的线程占用其他。
另一方面，这种负载是不一样的使用Kakarot，而如果你要插入六角和你做有趣的事情，不要惊讶，什么是需要有人来编译和挂在你的关心线程是一样的。
这就是说，发生在我见过的处理等问题在那里
你为什么不上传GitHub的项目？
对于许多原因：
首先，它诞生，因为没有公开psgroove有效载荷（或至少我没有看到源代码），而且只限于个人在有效载荷工作，没有能够加载游戏。所以，我倒port1_config_descriptor和拆卸，由有效载荷和AerialX贡献，在某些游戏结束充电无磁盘在ps3wiki.lan.st评论扶助。
当时的想法是有一个源，可以建立和改善那些没有道德或法律限制，影响其他人，我们对那些谁构成了不同的想法，或者没有这样的限制，并希望作出我们的贡献砂障碍。
另一方面，不要认为这是公平的（或像我们在计划的同事说：“法律”）添加一个平行psgroove GitHub的，当原来的作者已经有这样的说法，或认为这是公平的加我为作者的版权有效载荷是不是我的，因为原来的作者，都是所谓的已知部分“psjailbreak。”从我的角度来看，有效载荷代码属于版权疑问与一些匿名的绅士，但仍属于他们，我作为一个帮助用户和爱好者程序员（非营利课程）一些改进，简单。因此，我不能（或不应该）加入版权，但我觉得很自由地增加改进。
如果别人想要，甚至改变代码有借口这样做，这是他们的权利，但我认为你不能犯规，例如通过更换与GPL的许可证和有效载荷的代码是没有得到很好地说， “版权爱马仕”，除非原来的团队确实，这让我要配合我的更改撰写。如果原作者不一样的想法，将另一方面metamos代码，但它不是像他们一直非常尊重和法律，至少我带来的改善和我看，不只是从其他代码。
我也觉得应该是一个场景的集体努力，而不是组，当一个群体形成，这意味着对其他用户的参与和对发展的制约限制。
例如，假设明天我挂在GitHub项目。谁可以提高他们的贡献？。只有那些我给谁离开，因为我管理，所有这些想法不嫁我的哲学，并最终可能会被添加在同一
一个明显的例子是这样的：我有一个工作理念，Kakarot例如，不同意你认为我们可以在这方面合作？。我认为这是一个否定的，他可以包括你喜欢我的代码，我可以包括我喜欢她，但都遵循不同的路径，有冲突的想法。因此，GitHub的无法工作。
如此简单。 RAR的全包在我看来，一个非常好的解决方案以促进发展和有效载荷移植到某些人，当然，可以让你的补丁或改变的源，甚至在某些方面追随他的自己的道路。 GitHub的将是很好的，如果这真的是开源的友好，并愿意工作在同一方向上，这有一个过度的规模，但目前这里还没有被输入到有效载荷超出增加一些“戳“的游戏，并答那是小于25KB压缩，我不认为这是大问题
为什么不支持其他版本的固件？
有两个原因：第一，我只有一台PS3，并有3.41固件。第二个是，我认为是错误的工作，过去的版本，因为他们提供较少的兼容性与游戏，更难以找到补丁，最后，只会以倍数× 10的工作变得更糟的结果。
我知道有些人这样做是为了保持Linux等，但在生活中你不能拥有一切，在我看来，是不合逻辑的态度来工作，例如，为3.15，当有游戏，我们呼吁为3.42，似乎更合乎逻辑向前推进，重点了解他在做什么的3.41固件比任何其他人（这是标准）。
偷看/捅，36个和8个系统调用系统调用
解释这些系统调用这些高需求，几乎在我看来，perogruyo：我坦率地说，偷看戳系统调用不一样，因为只有8个字节的数据和移动都非常简单，坦率地说。但是，尽管我有一个更好的解决方案（memcpy的由syscall8）的黄金规则必须有任何开发，是尽可能向后兼容。还戳和PEEK lv2窗口所使用的一些，看起来有点笨的限制。
由于这个原因，36个系统调用不应该删除管理器中打开，而其他可以让你轻松切换，我们是把责任推给那些谁开发的计划，将要处理的那些谁不能改变系统调用36个（其中psjailbrak有，例如），并限制在事件我们自己，这支球队需要的东西，我们可以利用的。
系统调用8是一个非常有用的工具箱。尽管一些意见，我觉得它是如此难以了解，它本质上是一个开关/箱的连接等功能，该系统调用和syscall8.h其运作enough解释，但任何人都可以在这里询问他们不咬人。
系统调用8我当时解释，让您复制，填充零点，在内核中执行程序，甚至设备和文件重定向使用一个数据结构，如syscall8.h解释
但有趣的特点有三个：一个模式使我们能够确定这是访问权限和其他两个允许我们禁用或启用的系统调用我们的使用。
所以syscall8_disable（键），允许应用程序隐藏戳/偷看/系统调用系统调用本身甚至是36只工作8 syscall8_enable预期（键）的权利。
64位密钥是用来使系统调用只可能再次与正确的密钥，从而防止一个应用程序或游戏，蛮力，很容易得出正确的关键，因为它也限制了重试次数。
在我看来，一个地狱的解决方案，以避免危险情况的系统调用的应用程序允许访问LV2是一种耻辱，有些人似乎不明白，使用具有这些功能，而只有排除不，我已经写了一本书，在汇编程序的功能说，即使像我这样一个新手的PPC汇编，我想了解（并在syscall8更多关于它的操作说明依靠）。
为什么要留在0x7ff000有效载荷？这不是很危险吗？
我住那里，因为我们没有足够的空间来存储代码。因此，我们有两个选择：要么修改代码以适应其原来的地方，剥夺了我们，或住在其他地方的潜力似乎并不麻烦，因为代码就像LV2 2 MB的房子前向有效载荷。
危险的是一切生命，如果有人上诉到游戏后面的有效载荷崩溃，可能是由于其他原因，而不是房子于一体，在所有我做过的转储放置代码，是由零占用（如果看见否则，会不会选择包括代码）
而且我不是那种没有谁做很多事情，如果没有相当的土壤测试，并进入游戏，走出去，然后重新启动人的眼睛。而事实是，由于我用开经理（原来的，而不是那些谁使用谁没有你的源代码，包括相同的废话，改变什么东西，只是可以选择开启/关闭键），所有OMANXXXXX夹游戏，我没有崩溃，除了在游戏中罕见的，需要努力，如果没有进入，因为是显而易见的。
很显然，我对市场上所有的游戏，而我不能告诉你有例外，违反了规则，但最有可能做任何事情比在内核中的有效载荷能力的其他游戏皮特。
问候
转自http://ps3cn.com/read.php?tid=8. |
|
川公网安备 51019002005286号
楼主
发表于 2010-10-19 20:21 · 湖北
