Slashdot Mirror
Lindows CEO Funds XBox Hacking Contest
Kai writes "PCWorld.com recently posted an article on how Lindows CEO Michael Robertson is funding the 'Linux on XBox Hacking Challenge'. He was previously annonymous donor who donated $200,000 to the project. His donation will be split in to two prizes, one to who completes part A of the challenge, and the other to the who completes part B. Part A, running Linux on the XBox, has already been completed, but Part B, running Linux on XBox with no hardware modifications has yet to be completed. Part A of the challenge can be downloaded from Sourceforge." Without a bios change, it seems like part B might be a bit tricky. T. adds: Tricky, but not hopeless. Eric C. writes "The Neo Project recently updated its client so users can use free processor cycles to try and crack the private key that Microsoft uses to sign Xbox software."
The guy funding the Linux XBOX project is a direct competitor of MS. Kinda cheapens the whole thing, duddn't it? At least that's how I felt.
I mean, if it works it works. But his motivations place him at MS's level.
somebody correct the SF link
lol. The article points to sourceforget.net, not sourceforge. Might want to fix that :)
I like the project... but is this feasible? Wouldn't cracking the X-Box encryption key violate the DMCA and put a lot of people in trouble? Microsoft could afford the lawyers, you know.
Anyways, good luck to them.
Geoff "Dissonance" Gasior at The Tech Report has made an interesting comment regarding how Lindows could potentially take advantage of open-source "R&D".
The Neo Project recently updated its client so users can use free processor cycles to try and crack the private key that Microsoft uses to sign Xbox software.
Unfortunately the server apears to be slashdotted. Let's hope that just means a lot of people want to help with that task. This of course makes me want to ask about the legality of doing this. Does people risk getting sued by downloading the client?
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
Welcome to a maibox full of "IANAL, but I play one on Slashdot, and..." messages.
Also, the site is slashdotted, but from what I can make out, it seems to be a Windows client. Ironic, nes pas? Does anyone know if it runs under wine?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Most of what I see is Anti-WindowsBashing, basically the moderators saying: "Shut the fuck up, god kills 500 fluffy kittens every time you use a dollar-sign somewhere besides currency notation"
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
That's astronomically more than most BANKS use today
There are two places in the Xbox suspectible to a "no-modchip" attack - but with $100k being offered no real _groups_ of hackers are targetting this yet
it's in my head
The way it works is, once the hardware is hackable without any physical modification, Lindows Company buys mass quantities of Xboxes from Wallmart for $199/unit, loads Lindows OS on it, and sells it to consumers for a new low price of $59 dollars at the same Walmart chain.
Sure, they will take a loss of about $140 dollars, but they're counting on the royalty fees from Click'N'Game warehouse with such titles as:
Tux Racer Ultra
Totally Real Tournament 2003
Beyond Tetris eXtreme
Revamped version of Minesweeper in 3d
...and finally, gnuCash.
.NET .. but that's just a rumor iirc.
The most important feature in the upcoming Lindows XBOX of course would be the ability of users to CHANGE THE WALLPAPER and Play Music on it (MP3). Just think of the possibilities. This revolutionary "box" will change the way people experience mediocrity.
Insiders tell me that Lindows, headed by genious Michael Robertson, is moving full scale ahead with this new business plan, plus more. And something about Colonizing Planet Mars and training chimps to be able to write clean C#, server side code for web applications in
For $200,000 couldn't he have done something more useful like funded the design of an opensourced Linux-based console? I mean really if they could make some deals and get some good video and maybe wireless networking intergrated into a mini-ITX motherboard and put together a Dreamcast/GameCube sized case with a dvd-rom drive and room for a hdd they'd have something sweet. Really the current crop of mini-itx motherboards/cases are already nice for affordable music/video playback and work rather well for playing games a couple years old.. a lil boost to the video and you'd have things set.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
- How many bits are in the x-box "trusted software" permission-to-run keys? What about in Palladium? For these N-bit keys, what is the approximate difficulty of brute-forcing it as compared to, say, brute-forcing RSA?
- Distributed clients like this one, as far as i am aware, just get parcelled out random blocks of the "possible key" space, and send back which numbers they checked, right? Is there any way to PROVE those numbers were, in fact, correctly checked, besides asking multiple clients to check each individual block and hoping that at least one of the clients tells the truth? Like, is there anything to prevent Microsoft from just randomly calling up the project with a bunch of dummy clients that submit the REAL x-box key a couple times to the "i've checked this and it's not the key" list? ((Well.. okay.. I can think of a way to do that.. but it would require actually USING Palladium, to ensure everyone submitting blocks to the crack-Palladium project is using an unaltered, approved, digitally-signed Palladium-cracking client. So, uh, that's right out.) I know previous distributed projects have had issues with clients lying about their results in order to boost statistics, but this is the first time i'm aware of there has been a massively distributed computational work in which there is a specific party with a vested, active interest in the project being actually sabotaged.
- Were the Palladium keys to be cracked, is there anything MS could do at that point? Is there any way they could just Windows Update all the Palladium installs out there to suddenly use some new backup key, and invalidate the old one? It would seem the answer is no, becuase it seems that would automatically mean all of the existing palladium software in the entire world would suddenly become "untrusted" and have to be re-compiled at the vendor with the new keys, or something, but maybe there's something i'm missing. Is there something i'm missing? And anyway, aren't the palladium keys going to be stored in hardware, in some special Intel chip? Or something? How is a Palladium app marked as "Trusted By The MS Signing Authority", exactly, anyway? I haven't been following this as closely as i should have been.
I'm confused and ignorant. Please explain things to me.Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
The linked article in the parent suggests that this is a sneaky way to deliver an Xbox version of Lindows.
The Xbox Linux team have done the necessary work for any distro to be made to work with the Xbox, and you can download the necessary kernel patches from sourceforge.
But the two main distros that have been made have been Debian, by Ed Hucek, and Mandrake 9, mainly by Michael Steil and Milosch Meriac (both of these distros are available from SF). So this kind of deflates the argument that this is somehow a wheeze to help Lindows.
Also of course, the XBox makes a pretty lousy computer. It was never designed for that.
Mr. Robertson's project is indeed important, but am I the only one having trouble using vi with a gamepad?
The article states: "Also, last June a Massachusetts Institute of Technology student claimed to crack the Xbox's security system, potentially allowing users to run any software on the system." Following the link... "Using a custom circuit board, made in spare time in a three-week period for a total cost of about $50, Massachusetts Institute of Technology student Andrew Huang was able to tap traffic between Xbox components and uncover the keys that unlock the device's protection," So does that mean the security keys have already been found? Why can't someone working for the NeoProject do the same thing that this guy did? It seems it would be more feasible to rebuild something that has worked in the past than it would be to try and brute force the key.
he'll want Lindows running on it without any modifications.
Consumers see Dell, HP, Gateway, and other popular brands while Lindows is on a generic box. Maybe those K-Mart boxes aren't selling, so he wants a more popular box.
Activly funding a project to reverse engineer something that is protected by the DCMA?
Not that i agree with the law, but by doing this dont they open themselves up for legal action?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Absent Palladium, just generating a collision pwould probably be enough to get a bootloader through. A neat trick would be to add to some existing software which has already run the checksum . Of course, distributing such a disk would be a gross violation of Microsoft's copyright , and thus defeat the point of the exercise.
... just think of a server with an unknown root pasword sitting on your desk.
However a patch might be a different matter, especially in countries that do not agree with the DCMA.
There are LOTS of ways to get around protection when the hardware can be tampered with, even if you don't modify its structure
This is not a signature.
is to take advantage of open-source R&D. Why have open-source R&D if nobody takes advantage of it?
you might get some nice drawings of such a console.
Troed, this is what I say, that ''the necessary work for any distro to work with the Xbox'' has been done.
My point was though that to date, Lindows has not been ported as far as I know. So the parent's idea that this is the Xbox Lindows project rather than Xbox Linux seems unfounded.
Besides, it seems unlikely Lindows would release a commericial distro that needs a modchip to run. Although us tinkerers lose sight of it, only a tiny fraction of end users are going to open their box and fit a mod.
Maybe if a way is found to run unsigned code without a modchip there might reasonably be a Lindows distro for the Xbox.
But I don't think that's why the money is being offered. I think MR has his ''Fuck You'' money and has made a nice choice about telling who to fuck themselves.
He has said in interviews recently that he doesn't care which version of Linux is used to achive the goal. It just has to be repeatable. The idea is to prevent Microsoft from jumping ship from the PC to a closed MS hardware platform for PCs which would truely exclude other OSs from the marketplace.
Then what are these?
+3, Interesting
+4, Informative
Look pretty pro-Windows to me. And high moderated too.
Or how about these highly moderated anti-Linux posts?
Linux UIs suck
Linux is too late
XFree86 is a mess
A long way to go
http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2003/01/03/rtr83678 5.html
"There is no business justification; that's not why I did it," Robertson told News.com of his rationale behind the contest. "I did it because I thought people should have the choice to run the software they want on the hardware of their choice."
Robertson said that Xbox is designed much like a PC with a closed operating system run on Intel microprocessors. He argues that as it has done with PCs, Microsoft is trying to make its software the defacto operating system in gaming consoles.
"I think Xbox sets a dangerous precedent," he told CNET News.com.
I know many nerds want to give MS a kick on the nose but all they do with this is helping them fine tuning the Palladium technology. If i want to play games i sure as h*ll dont buy an Xbox. If i want linux, well PS2 already have linux, why bother with the useless Xbox? Its just an old ancient PC by now, you can get one cheaply from Ebay.
Pointless and stupid projekt, do something useful instead. Build an emulator for Xbox, that would be useful atleast.
HTTP/1.1 400
When the XBOX starts up, it loads the hash of the header into memory and decrypts a 2048 bit RSA signature and compares this to the header hash. If it matches, the program proceeds and it loads another section and does the same thing. There is no way to get around this either than knowing the private key or a hardware modification.
The RSA signature used to sign/for comparison purposes used with Xbox execuatables is 2048 bits long.
Common secure internet traffic, carrying thousands of credit card numbers as we speak, uses 128 bit keys (almost always).
It's virturally impossible with today's computational power and methods to break a 2048 bit key. Even if you somehow had all the processing power of all the current distributed systems, it would still take many thousands of years to break using classical methods. You either need several thousand years or an optical/DNA computer whose concept hasn't been refined yet.
In case some of your forget: it gets exponetionally harder as the length of the key increases. It's not like you just have to search a 128 bit key space 16 times. There are fancy methods where by you can get away with knowing some of the key like differential analysis, but when you increase the size of the key the performance of those tend to fall off also where you have no increase over brute force and man in the middle attacks.
So don't even think about joining that futile brute force effort, because it will just waste your time. What Lindows should have done is hire a hit man/career criminal to break into Microsoft or a 3rd party who has the key and steal it. Or optionally pay off an Xbox developer or employee who has similar access. Either way, it would be both cheaper and actually give the real key, unlike all of this nonsense.
"I'll just chip in a bit for RedHat: I actually have that installed on my university machine." - Linus, '95
"Are you high? What exactly are you trying to prove anyways?"
That, in contradiction to popular belief, Slashdot is NOT an anti-Windows pro-Linux place. Duh.
There are only very few pro-Linux-anti-Windows people, in spite of what you think. Ditto for "elitists", "zealots", or whatever people come up with tomorrow. They're like 5% of the entire community.
"Using Windows out of necessity (propietary software for the system)."
So? Still pro-Windows.
"Skimmed it, but it seems to be offering suggestions for Linux to compete, not ripping it apart."
But still pro-Windows. I never said those posts rip Linux apart, I said they are pro-Windows.
"because if I weren't using a Mac I would most likely run Linux"
"but I see no way Linux will compete as a mass desktop OS until it becomes far easier for the average user."
My my, dont we have our panties in a bind.. GF didnt put out again for ya?
Get a life.
Notice i didnt resort to using insulting labels. Life is too short to worry about misplaced characters, or spending time insulting people while showing your low mental ability in the process..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Does anyone know how game developers get the codes to authenticate their executables? Do they just upload them to some secured server of Microsoft, and get the signature back?
If that's the case, getting into that server might be easier than brute-forcing the key.
This is true, however, the problem lies in what data must be signed by the private key. Code signing works by making a hash of the code (in this case, the OS loader or the like, which in our case would be the Linux loader) and signing that hash with the private key. The bootrom then uses the Microsoft public key to verify that the OS was signed by the Microsoft private key. Thus, the only ways that this could reasonably be done is by:
1) Getting the microsoft private key
2) Making the hash of the OS the same as the has of the MS OS (nigh unto impossible)
3) Changing the public key in the bootrom (which isn't allowed for this stage of the competition, at least hardware wise)
4) Somehow switching the OS after the initial code signing check is completed
Here's a reference if you want to read more Code signing
"Why are you trying to prove that?"
Why are you asking this?
"And they weren't really pro-Windows (the last 4 that is)"
Sure, ignore the fact that I explicitly stated that the last few links are anti-Linux instead of pro-Windows...
"Now, if you could figure out the number of slashdot accounts that are throw away troll accounts, then I'd be impressed (I'd guess there's ~9,000)."
Urgh... make that 9,000 milion.
We proved that the validation algorithm is fully known, by reverse engineering it and testing it on known good files.
The C app incorporating the test can be had from CVS at:
http://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=54192
The module name is xbedump. This was work from Franz Lehner and Asterisk, based on the dump app by Michael Steil.
Which of the following is smallest?:
Ironically, Hollywood found an easier way to break any encryption in their movie "Sneakers."
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
The key might not be put in an especially vulnerable place like the bus to calculate the hash. The hash may be computed in the hardware. But given the incredible size of the number (2048 bit), wouldn't it simply be easier to dissect the hardware and try to figure out the key that way?
The X-Box runs, after all, in a "hostile" environment. It doesn't check up against MS servers every time it runs. So all the relevant keys used for encryption, public or private, have to exist in some form or another on the X-Box itself.
I might be misunderstanding the issue. Anyone care to explain this for me?
Why would any sane person spend hundreds of thousands of his own dollars just to run Linux on an Xbox? I mean, why not just buy a $199 Lindows box from Walmart, instead?
The plan at its heart is very simple:
(1) If you want to run Xbox games buy an Xbox
(2) If you want to run Linux on similar hardware buy a Lindows machine
The guy is acting as if you can't run Linux on anything *except* an Xbox, and Microsoft is standing in the way!....What rubbish! You can run Linux on practically *anything*--hence there is no need or justification for this at all.
Microsoft does not market, imply, or pretend in any fashion that the xBox is a general-purpose computer. It is manufactured and marketed as a game console. If people buy it under any other delusion--well, that's their problem as I see it. The won't be the first to try and turn a sou's ear into a silk purse.
I have to believe, honestly, that the poor fellow is suffering mentally somehow, since there are far better ways to gain publicity about your products for the same amount of money. Interesting that you don't see Microsoft pulling boneheaded stunts like this--maybe that's why they've been successful (hint.)
Put together a boot loader and ask MS to sign it. If they do not turn around and sue them under the terms of the approved judgement and or a anti-trust suit.
Got Code?
Then where has my 200,000 dollars gone?
Keep your packets off my GNU/Girlfriend!
Its strange to consider that Microsoft didn't protect parts of the hardware with fips rated hardware like some crypto cards are. In case you don't know what FIPS means, it is "Federal Information Protection Standard", and parts of it covers secure hardware. Stuff like crypto accellerator boards that self destruct if you attempt to x-ray, or break the hermetricly sealled gel enclosures. Stuff like that protects the boards from people who would attempt to reverse engineer hardware. Microsoft *did* do some things to make life hard for hackers with the way the HDD works. Microsoft does stuff that is more anoying than a barrier to reverse engineering.
Locating the private keys for the games would be the best way to hack an xbox. Considering a modified xbox will not jive with future xbox games, and or network servives... the hardware mod is not desireable.
Further more, hacking contests should be managed by the original vendor, in this case Microsoft. Think of the RSA crypto challenges. Those are fair contests, that actually interest crypto folks to invest serrious effort, and brain power.
It isn't a lie if you belive it.
And yes, the Xbox may not be the best computer, but think about what you can do with it; USB ports, built in network, TV outs, and a USB Video Capture module made by hauppage (I think) means you could get your Xbox to run as a PVR. On top of that, a website could be developed so your Xbox PVR can connect and get television schedules and programming information so your PVR isn't like a very old VCR where all you can is press 'record'.
Now not only do you have a halfway decent gaming console, but you have a $200 TiVo with no advertising. (Well, $300 or so including the cost of the vid capture unit.) That alone is motivation enough for me to hope this offered reward brings forth a solution.
Linux: The world's best text-adventure game.
This wasn't a Slashdot meta comment. I don't give a snot what OS's you lot are using to view this site, I'm commenting that it's ironic that a project to run the Linux OS on a Microsoft product relies on a Microsoft OS. Not every comment on Slashdot is self referential.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I on the other hand would point out merely that some of the posts seem Anti-Linux, not Pro-Windows, but more importantly that this leaves all of 2 pro-windows posts that you managed to find out of millions of messages.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Everyone who is interested in this should read the excellent book "The Code Book" by Simon Singh. It explains the complete history of cryptography in terms that anyone with a basic understanding of algebra can understand.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
" The idea is to prevent Microsoft from jumping ship from the PC to a closed MS hardware platform for PCs which would truely exclude other OSs from the marketplace."
I'd buy that if he remained anonymous. Now he's the little guy who'll become a martyr when MS crushes down on them. He basically bought off the Slashdot community.
It has to do with the 'no reverse engineering' clause in the DMCA
Actually, there exists a clause in the DMCA (17 USC 1201(f)) that specifically exempts reverse engineering, to the extent that it is required for interoperability, from the circumvention ban. (The DeCSS ruling turned out the way it did because Johansen put the cart before the horse and published a DeCSS program before a UDF filesystem for Linux or BSD was finished, making copying DVDs the "most apparent use" for DeCSS.)
Will I retire or break 10K?
OK, I'll take the bait, using the terminology from Applied Cryptography.
Let p = 4 and q = 9, as suggested.
Then, n = 36.
Choose e=65537 as the encryption key. (Common practice is to use a fixed e;
(p-1)(q-1) and 65537 are relatively prime.)
Now we need d such that ed === 1 (mod (3*8)),
so 65537*d === 1 mod 24.
d = 17.
Now let's encrypt m = 6.
c = 6^65537 mod 36 = 0 (!)
Now, let's decrypt.
t = 0^17 mod 36 = 0 (!)
The process will often fail in keygen as well (inability to find a decryption key, for instance), but encryption and decryption require that p and q are prime in order to work. Why would you say something like this? It's claims like yours that make slashdot a breeding ground of misinformation.
Incidentally as I'm sure the parent poster knows, this is exactly how PGP works.
You have someone's public key, so you can decrypt their stuff, but you don't have the private key so you can't encrypt stuff to make it seem like they wrote it.