[jarmster]

lv1 is the hypervisor and lv2 is gameOS. They do not decrypt themselves and i would resign them so that the 355 ldr would load them

[master737373]

Originally Posted by jarmster lv1 is the hypervisor and lv2 is gameOS. They do not decrypt themselves

I know that. I said lv2ldr. I meant to say lv1ldr instead of lv1 though. My bad.
************* [ - Post Merged - ] *************

Originally Posted by jarmster lv1 is the hypervisor and lv2 is gameOS. They do not decrypt themselves and i would resign them so that the 355 ldr would load them

But they're encrypted. You'd need the lv1 and lv2 loaders first of the 3.60+ firmware.

[jarmster]

there not encrypted in ram.....holy moly dude hense the purpose of dumping it

lol your making me tired....im going to bed

here a thought....they put everything into lvl0. and encrypted it with the lv0 key
do you think they re-encrypted the ldrs and lvl's with there own keys too. or all of it with just the one key

[master737373]

Originally Posted by jarmster there not encrypted in ram.....holy moly dude hense the purpose of dumping it lol your making me tired....im going to bed

Yeah, in ram they're not. Which is where the dual nor with a signed lv1 that I was talking about came from.

[jarmster]

man...we have finally come full circle....that is why im saying we need to dump ram. that has been my whole arguement the whole time. getting lvl0 is not fruitless and should not be ignored because its not the bootldr. we could have updated cfw for every fw we want. Who cares if the fw wasn't signed with current keys, we have keys that will work.

[master737373]

Originally Posted by jarmster man...we have finally come full circle....that is why im saying we need to dump ram. that has been my whole arguement the whole time. getting lvl0 is not fruitless and should not be ignored because its not the bootldr. we could have updated cfw for every fw we want. Who cares if the fw wasn't signed with current keys, we have keys that will work.

Lol yes, I understand that part. What I'm saying is that, once you update to that 4.11 cfw or whatever, you won't be able to update to any other cfw unless you patch out the firmware pup check. I was just saying that getting lv0 will only be temporary since Sony can change lv0 quickly. Then you'll end up with a cfw that can't take anymore cfw.

That's why I was trying to get at bootldr. But you won't get lv0, just what's necessary.

[jarmster]

e3 is saying if downgrade to a 355 nochecks then downgrade to ofw341. we can upgrade to whatever we want.....not sure if they figured something out.
second, if your fashing a cfw,whatever fw. why wouldnt you patch out the checks.We patch the checks now already

even if they change lv0, every fw update...i can still get it again the same way...dump ram

bootldr just makes things simple...

and beside...you dont need to update the fw everytime....just update keys unless fw has new features worth having

[master737373]

Originally Posted by jarmster e3 is saying if downgrade to a 355 nochecks then downgrade to ofw341. we can upgrade to whatever we want.....not sure if they figured something out. second, if your fashing a cfw,whatever fw. why wouldnt you patch out the checks.We patch the checks now already even if they change lv0, every fw update...i can still get it again the same way...dump ram bootldr just makes things simple... and beside...you dont need to update the fw everytime....just update keys unless fw has new features worth having

No, no no. I'm not talking about hash checks. I'm talking about firmware pup checks. And the whole rehashing thing has been known for a long time now. E3 is a little late on that. I'm talking about the checks that were started with 3.56. The one when it's like this, when you update to 3.56, you won't be able to install a cfw. You can only install cfw from 3.55 and below.

[jarmster]

Doesn't flashing firmware with e3 bypass pup checks?

[master737373]

Originally Posted by jarmster Doesn't flashing firmware with e3 bypass pup checks?

No, flashing a firmware doesn't bypass anything. patching lv1 bypasses the hash checks.

The pup check isn't done with lv1. I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's lv2.