Re: [opx-devel] Message from Mike C (fwd)

[Mike V. <mik...@ge...>]

Heh, yeah my fault :)

Mike Tangolics wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The main issue is that there is no real need for this key anymore.  The
> Xbox was cracked long ago, you can now run anything you want on it.
> Personally, I like being involved when things are cutting edge and are
> breaking new ground.  I even sold my Xbox because I'm not that
> interested in it anymore.  The only thing this key is good for is
> flaunting in MS's face and then they'll just sue your ass, or better yet
> imprison you for some god awful crime against "national security" but I
> won't even get into that...
>
> Btw guys.. you'll be interested to know Mike Valstar _has_ been replying
> to this thread as well, but made the mistake I did originally and sent
> it only to the writer, not the list.  =)
>
> Tom Wirschell wrote:
> | On Sun, 2004-07-04 at 22:36, Will wrote:
> |
> |>That's just the same as abandoning the project!
> |
> |
> | Newsflash, kiddo. That's exactly what we did.
> |
> |
> |>Maybe the current source code could be reworked to integrate the better
> |>features of the source code used to crack the ECCP-109 but this isn't
> |>even close to a solution.
> |
> |
> | My goodness. The only way ECCP-109 and RSA-2048 are equivalent is that
> | they both require a distributed network to brute-force them. There 
> isn't
> | any algorithm tweak you can apply to both to magically make things go
> | faster. Oh, and perhaps you'll want to take another look at those
> | numbers I sent out earlier. Consider what kind of *MASSIVE* improvement
> | you'll need to make to the algorithm to make its cracking feasible.
> |
> |
> |>To continue the project now the word of it must be spread. I'm doing
> |>what I can but I don't have any connections to people high up with Xbox
> |>Scene or the Xbox Linux Project. It would be great if the project was
> |>somehow mentioned in news posts on their sites. To some the project
> |>itself may seem impractical but just the idea of getting the key keeps
> |>me going.
> |
> |
> | Think about this for a second. You're trying to rally the troops. To do
> | what? What's needed to do that? Where are those things you need? What
> | can you do to get them?
> |
> | Lemme help you with that. You need:
> | 1) Math guys. The kind that win Nobel Prizes. Because I can almost
> | guarantee you that if someone finds a way to make the cracking of RSA
> | more feasible, that person will go down in history as one of the
> | greatest minds of our time.
> | 2) Infrastructure. You want to do this in a distributed fashion, you'll
> | need a couple of servers that can take a bit of a beating. In the
> | beginning 1 will do fine, but plan ahead. Expect it to grow. Know to
> | what volume it can/will grow without falling over. Because if it does,
> | your project will invariably suffer. You are aware that there are
> | kiddies out there with fat pipes at their disposal and nothing 
> better to
> | do than point them at your server for a solid week, right?
> | 3) Server software. You know it'll be a distributed project, so you 
> need
> | a protocol, and a server that will be able to talk it. Oh, and that
> | server needs to be set up in such a way that it can take a beating. The
> | server software has to be resilient from the get-go, and the same goes
> | for the protocol. People *LOVE* cheating.
> | 4) Client software. At first it just has to work. Once things take off
> | you'll get to making them more efficient. Hell, the first client we had
> | ran at roughly 1/10th the speed the last one did.
> | 5) Machines. This is the point where you rally the troops, point at all
> | the stuff you've got ready for them, and you'll be able to convince 
> them
> | that the concept is feasible. Showing people that your goal is
> | attainable within a given timeframe (and saying that you're sure you'll
> | get it in under 10 years should be enough) and being able to back it up
> | will make people become willing to run your programs.
> |
> | Now, these points you need to go through in the order they are listed.
> |
> | When we started, Mike C had point 4 in the pocket and was going 
> after 5.
> | We came in to improve the clients, and guess what? Point 3 turned 
> out to
> | have been overlooked. The protocol was a joke, and soon everybody was
> | cheating. We tried to solve this problem, but point 5 was suffering and
> | people were leaving the project in droves.
> | Then point 2, which at first seemed to be okay, turned out to be crap.
> | Again we tried our best to fix things but point 5 suffered even 
> more. In
> | the end that one became our Waterloo.
> | And the reason we didn't start over was because point 1 was missing. We
> | realised it back then, but figured what the hell. I donno about the 
> rest
> | of the crew, but I'm not making that mistake again.
> |
> | Kind regards,
> |
> | Tom Wirschell
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFA6JyU7ntAARlGIUERAhfhAKCZBeLvEpzIRspnga8TDWn8JthzRwCgvVzM
> JXYbSIDcKVAN9RG8jD2y7ag=
> =hHxR
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
> Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital 
> self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched 
> networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
> _______________________________________________
> opx-devel mailing list
> opx...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opx-devel