Well, you do have the right idea, but you're going about it wrong. To find a valid key, if you don't exactly know what you're doing, you have to use brute force. Now, what I'm thinking is this: You write a little test program to replace a little bit of code where the iPod boots up. The iPod is plugged into the PC, and a macro is running that reassembles the program with a different encryption key and reboots the iPod. This is done until the computer finds a working encryption key (a value could be written to a file from the test program or something).
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 5:19 PM, The Seven <these...@gmx.net> wrote: > So have we got somewhere on the 2G/4G? > Actually I'm very interested about your ideas, even though I think I > have got quite a comprehensive overview about those things and the only > plan that I could think of that doesn't run into a dead end somewhere is > figuring out that return address and making our exploit work. > Nevertheless, I would be very pleased to discuss your ideas here. > I may have missed something, and even if I didn't, I would at least like > to clarify *why* a certain plan can't work in the end. > So please just explain your ideas... > > Keanen Shaw schrieb: > > I will do neither of those things. I have a few ideas of what to do > myself, > > but I'm sure none of you would listen. The guy who emailed me about my > last > > message didn't even email me back after my response, so I have no reason > to > > believe that you guys are getting anywhere. > > > > On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 3:39 PM, The Seven <these...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> Do you feel like opening it and soldering on the PCB? > >> Or maybe donate it to stooo, our "hardware wizard"? > >> We may indeed need another 3G for board-level testing... > >> > >> Keanen Shaw schrieb: > >>> Hey people, since I'm on the mailing list I thought it would be > >> appropriate > >>> for me to actually say something without you blokes ignoring it. So, > for > >> the > >>> last time, I have an iPod Nano 3G that I can run any kind of test on > you > >>> want. It is pretty much disposable, as I have no way to use it now that > >> I'm > >>> running Puppy Linux. Anyone want to say "nice to know" or "we'll keep > in > >>> touch"? I'm not going to deal with this bullshit anymore. > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Linux4nano-dev mailing list > >>> Linux4nano-dev@gna.org > >>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev > >>> http://www.linux4nano.org > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Linux4nano-dev mailing list > >> Linux4nano-dev@gna.org > >> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev > >> http://www.linux4nano.org > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Linux4nano-dev mailing list > > Linux4nano-dev@gna.org > > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev > > http://www.linux4nano.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux4nano-dev mailing list > Linux4nano-dev@gna.org > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev > http://www.linux4nano.org > _______________________________________________ Linux4nano-dev mailing list Linux4nano-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev http://www.linux4nano.org
