Bahattin TOZYILMAZ wrote:
 > ...or BLACK color in logo ... LOGO because it is small,
 > and contains an exact image we know.

What exactly do we know about the encoding? Is it the same as in 
unencrypted firmwares? What format did they use earlier?

tof wrote:
 > hello everybody
 >
 > i'm still there ;)
great!

 > i will probably need 2 months to achieve a working thing,
 > however i will need the help of ASM specialists, to write and compile 
the little parts of ARM code...
Well, I'm an x86 assembly specialist, but not ARM. But in case there is 
nobody else who would do it, I would happily read through some ARM docs 
to help you out. I'll need to do that anyway to be able to participate 
in disassembling the appleOS and writing drivers etc. once we get some 
code to boot.

By the way, I found an interesting firmware bug. No idea whether we 
could use that to
exploit something, but obviously the FAT driver of the iPods firmware is
not really FAT32 aware.

I was just debugging a weird issue that the iPod just refuses to store
play counts, and found out the following:
- When the iPod tries to create a play countall clusters below number
65536 are used, the cluster number stored in the directory entry for
that file wraps. The upper word is always stored as zero. The data of
that file are placed in the correct location somewhere near ~7GB, but
the directory entry points to somewhere near ~178MB. However, for some
reason, the iPod deletes that directory entry again before I connect it
to my PC, so no data corruption will occur.

While tracing this, I also noticed that the iPod creates an iTunesLock
file which is normally used by iTunes and some 3rd party iPod managers
to ensure exclusive access to the iTunesDB file. But why does the iPod
create and afterwards delete that file? As long as it isn't connected
via USB it should know that it has exclusive access...
And it does create and delete an empty file called $$TestFile$$ in the 
root directory. What the heck ist that one good for?

Are there any news from the hardware approach? We're so close!
Let's hope they used the same encryption again on Nano4G ;)

Regards

TheSeven

_______________________________________________
Linux4nano-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev
http://www.linux4nano.org

Reply via email to