PS3 Root Key Found

Same private key? by VGPowerlord · 2011-01-03 07:43 · Score: 4, Informative

Is this the same private key that was discovered last week?

--
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011

Re:Same private key? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-03 07:46 · Score: 5, Informative

No, this is the metldr private key. fail0verflow wasn't able to find that one as it required a metldr exploit
Re:Same private key? by waffle+zero · 2011-01-03 07:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

From what I understand it looks like he used the work from fail0verflow to calculate the private key. If anything he's probably the first person to publish the private signing key. The fail0verflow guys appear to be working to push out the documentation and code for others to reproduce and continue their work. I would guess they'll never actually post the keys they found on their own, just to save the hassle of being sued.
Re:Same private key? by evel+aka+matt · 2011-01-03 08:07 · Score: 4, Funny

I prefer people that iron it.
Re:Same private key? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-03 08:25 · Score: 4, Funny

If only I had a nickel for every time I zinc of a bad pun...
Re:Same private key? by Fnord666 · 2011-01-03 08:35 · Score: 4, Funny

OK, I zinc this has gone far enough.

--
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
Re:Same private key? by sexconker · 2011-01-03 08:52 · Score: 5, Informative

No, this is the metldr private key. fail0verflow wasn't able to find that one as it required a metldr exploit
No. fail0verflow had no interest in getting that key. Why? Because they're about homebrew, which they can already do, and they're (officially, at least) against piracy, which the metldr key would simplify.
There was a question asked about this at the end of their presentation. They basically said "Yeah, we don't have that key - we don't give a shit about it. Of course you can get it using the same method we just told you about.".
Re:Same private key? by marcansoft · 2011-01-03 12:00 · Score: 5, Informative
We (fail0verflow) discovered and released two things:
- An exploit in the revocation list parsing, enabling us to dump a bunch of loaders, and thus their decryption keys
- A humongous screwup by Sony, enabling us to calculate their private signing keys for all of those loaders, and thus sign anything to be loaded by those loaders
We used these techniques to obtain encryption, public, and private keys for lv2ldr, isoldr, the spp verifier, the pkg verifier, and the revocation lists themselves. We could've obtained appldr, (the loader used to load games and apps), but chose not to, since we are not interested in app-level stuff and that just helps piracy. We didn't have lv1ldr, but due to the way lv1 works, we could gain control of it early in the boot process through isoldr, so effectively we also had lv1 control.
With these keys we could decrypt firmware and sign our own firmware. And since the revocation is useless and the lame "anti-downgrade" protection is also easily bypassed, this already enables hardware-based hacks and downgrades forever. Basically, homebrew/Linux on every currently manufactured PS3, through software means now, and through hardware means (flasher/modchip) forever, regardless of what Sony tries to do with future firmwares.
The root of all of the aforementioned loaders is metldr, which remained elusive. Then Geohot announced that he had broken into metldr (with an exploit, analogous to the way we exploited lv2ldr to get its keys) and was thus able to apply our techniques one level higher in the loader chain. He has released the metldr keyset (with the private key calculated using our attack), but not the exploit method that he used.
The metldr key does break the console's security even more (especially with respect to newer, future firmwares - and thus also piracy of newer games), and also makes some things require less workarounds. Geohot clearly did a good job finding an exploit in it, but considering a) he used our key recovery attack verbatim, and b) he found his exploit right after our talk, so he was clearly inspired by something we said when we explained ours, I think we deserve a little more credit than we're getting for this latest bit of news.
There's still bootldr and lv0, which are used at the earliest point during the PS3 boot process. These remain secure, but likely mean little for the PS3 security at this stage.
Re:Same private key? by marcansoft · 2011-01-03 12:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

We published our exploits at the talk by explaining exactly how they works, and how anyone could use them. We said we'd release tools through the following month, and we already released two Git repositories containing most of the tools (that's 4 days after the talk). We didn't release keys due to fear of legal repercussions, but we told people exactly how to calculate them, and they did.
Geohot first released a useless signed loader to prove that he had the keys. Then he released the keys. He hasn't released information on how he got the metldr plaintext and apparently doesn't have plans to do so.
Personally, I think explaining things first, then a few days later releasing tools, is better than just dumping keys on the world and keeping how you got them a secret.
Re:Same private key? by anethema · 2011-01-03 14:06 · Score: 4, Interesting

Explaining can be good, but geohot is from the iPhone world. There, as soon as you released details on your exploit, Apple would patch it if possible. In one case they spun new hardware mid-cycle to patch a bootrom exploit on the 3GS.

Since geohot was able to release the keys (to the kingdom) without tipping his hand in this case, is it really bad?

Would it not be possible that Sony patches whatever exploit you guys used and detailed, added a whitelist for games under the current signature, and began using a new one, possibly nullifyng much of the work you guys have (brilliantly) done?

Is the way geohot did it (using your work again, totally with you guys there for credit) not better for the community in the long run, where now unless Sony finds the vulnerability he got in through he can keep providing these keys no matter what Sony does?

Hell Sony may even reuse hardware/firmware from the PS3 in the PS4 and geohot may again be able to get in and provide keys, or at least have a jumping off point.

Again, no knock on you guys, full disclosure is cool for nerds sake, its great to know all that stuff, but the way we do it in iPhone world is always trying to do whats better for the community/users. Not tipping your hand on the exploit used may be the way to go here.

--

It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

As an added bonus... PSP keys! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-03 07:49 · Score: 5, Informative

Mathieulh Has Found The PSP Master Keys, and now says

I can encrypt/sign anything on psp now.

Re:More Likely... by spun · 2011-01-03 07:54 · Score: 5, Funny

I wonder how long until the lawyers start raining down from the sky.

That sounds... very nice. I mean, assuming they are falling a long enough distance, that is.

--
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton

Re:Peeking under the hood by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-03 07:55 · Score: 5, Insightful

Neither. Sony botched their PKI implementation and the 'random number' they were using for their seed was anything but random. In fact it was the same every time! That made it trivial to solve for the key. Oops.

This went undetected for years until they ... removed Linux.

No sympathy for Sony by Ben4jammin · 2011-01-03 07:59 · Score: 5, Informative

Since they basically did a "bait and switch" with the PS3.

When I bought it, it had the OtherOS feather AND I could do all the online stuff...not now
When I bought it, it had backwards comparability for almost all PS2 games...not now

So it appears to me that in a sense the "hackers" have returned my property that was stolen from me by the "legitimate corporation"
I doubt that Sony will learn anything from this, and after our family owning a PS2 and 3, the next console I buy will be Xbox...I had no idea a company could be dysfunctional enough to make me regret not buying a MS product.

Re:No sympathy for Sony by bucky0 · 2011-01-03 08:46 · Score: 4, Informative

That's a good explanation except for the fact that there's a minimum OS version required to play online. One USED to be able to run otherOS and play online, and after a certain cutoff date, you had to choose to lose one or the other. That's where (some of) the contention comes from.

--

-Bucky
Re:No sympathy for Sony by Mysteray · 2011-01-03 09:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

Sure, the word "steal" is overloaded. Sony's entertainment industry seems to have a great fascination with the concept of people "stealing", and in that case many disagree with that use of the word.
But what's your point? Are you arguing some point of US law?
Normal people (i.e., non-lawyers) understand that the very fabric of commerce is based on "yours", "mine", "not yours", "not mine", "buying", "selling", "vendor", and "customer", etc.
There's not a lot of subtlety in these terms, because normal people are able to conduct their commerce without concepts like "stealing", "swindling", "crooked dealing", "cheating", or "screwing over your customer" even coming into question 99.9% of the time.
"Bait-and-switch" doesn't fit, neither does "planned obsolescence". Actually, Sony is breaking new ground here. I don't think normal people ever needed to invent a term for a vendor selling something and then intentionally breaking it by remote control years later.
So maybe you think it's significant that Sony presented some EULA on the TV and made the user press the green button before they could play the game they just bought.
But normal people don't. They see it for exactly what it is.
Nothing particularly subtle or complicated about it at all.
Re:No sympathy for Sony by Dhalka226 · 2011-01-03 09:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

The fact that you can separate the two actions--requiring updates to access the Internet and play new media (and indeed, also to continue using applications that have not been updated themselves such as the Netflix App) and "agreeing" to the upgrade--makes me seriously question your logic. It is a tactic a half step removed from "that's a nice car, it would be a shame if anything happened to it." In fact, it may be worse. At least if I pay the nice man in the trenchcoat his protection money he leaves my car alone. Sony promises to break your PS3. The only choice they give you is whether you want to lose features you've already paid for or lose the ability to play new games or utilize any features of your old games that happen to use the Internet, such as multiplayer or, as in my case, a baseball game that provides roster updates throughout the year.
It's called coercion, and it is grounds to nullify even the most strenuously negotiated contracts much less a click-through EULA that doesn't even specify how they're fucking you, just that they might. They are going to take something from you--your ability to play new games and fully utilize your old purchases--for absolutely no technical reason other than people who probably aren't you are using their machines in a way that Sony disapproves of (homebrew, cheap computing cluster, etc), unless you "agree" to let them take out features you've already paid for. It's nothing but a bargaining chip to force you to do as they tell you to do.
Frankly even that is too generous; bargaining chip implies there is negotiation and intelligent thought before determining which is the best course of action. Turning down these updates and effectively bricking your PS3 from that point in time forward is no more a choice than not paying the man in the trenchcoat. Do you really think it's any consolation to people who got rid of their old PS2s because they have this lovely new PS3 with backward compatibility that they weren't fucked in the ass until they "agreed" to it? Oh but don't worry dear consumer, we'll slowly start to release them as downloads for $9.99 a pop! Everybody wins!
The PS3 was the most locked-down piece of consumer hardware in the history of computing. Do you truly believe this update requirement was done as anything other than a way to force you to do what they want and patch any holes that might arise--the exact behavior we have seen from them? No, it's not about an unspoken agreement to produce content; if they stopped making PS3 games tomorrow I would be upset, but I wouldn't have been fucked. They are actively breaking my hardware, for all intents and purposes, unless I let them have their way. At the bottom of every game I buy--on the disc AND the packaging--is a little "PS3" logo. The idea that one disc might work and another might not in my PS3 based on whether I've let them screw me yet is ludicrous, and so is claiming that it is somehow a choice.
It goes well beyond shady. The fact that it hasn't been absolutely clobbered in civil suits yet is stunning. The idea that any court in the world would see it as anything less than illegal coercion boggles the mind.
And not that it should matter, but lest you think my outrage is personally motivated: I did buy my machine with the expectation of using OtherOS, but after a while I realized I simply wasn't going to go through the hassle and the update didn't affect me on a personal level. Likewise, I paid $600 at PS3 launch so my PS3 has hardware backward-compatibility and I am not personally affected by their removal of the software backward-compatibility in later updates. That doesn't make either of those decisions any less of an outrage.

Dear Sony.... by Lumpy · 2011-01-03 08:01 · Score: 5, Insightful

Still think revoking the "Other OS" function was a good idea?

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.

Re:Dear Sony.... by PhunkySchtuff · 2011-01-03 10:37 · Score: 4, Interesting

From memory, what happened is that with the OtherOS, Geohot was able to outline a proof of concept to run arbitrary code on the PS3.
He didn't release much, and nothing he released would have directly facilitated piracy - there were no keys exposed for instance.
Sony, in a knee-jerk reaction, promptly issued a software update that removed OtherOS support altogether - even though Geohot's work was just a proof of concept.
This is when the real work then started to get back what was once there - and in the process through discovering these keys, this has now opened the doors to piracy on the system.
If Sony had have kept OtherOS in there and instead done something like fixed the flaw in the hypervisor that allowed Geohot's exploit to work, or just ignored it and moved on, it's arguable that no one would have bothered to put in the effort they have recently to discover the crypto keys.

--
Specialist Mac support for creative pros, Melbourne

Re:private key on the machine? by Zerth · 2011-01-03 08:04 · Score: 5, Informative

Despite all the people claiming this is a dupe, it isn't. This is getting the PSP private key from inside the PS3.

They put the PSP private key on the PS3, presumably so you could buy games for your PSP through the PS3 and have the PS3 do all the heavy crypto work instead of encrypting it on the store end.

Presumably, they figured "hey, the PS3 is unhackable, it is OK to embed the super secret key to PSP software in it". But then the PS3 got hacked.

Re:PS2? by tuffy · 2011-01-03 08:06 · Score: 4, Informative

No. PS2 backwards compatibility required additional chips that aren't in the newer PS3s.

--

Ita erat quando hic adveni.

Re:More Likely... by by+(1706743) · 2011-01-03 08:11 · Score: 5, Funny

I wonder how long until the lawyers start raining down from the sky.

That sounds... very nice. I mean, assuming they are falling a long enough distance, that is.

*mumbles something about lawyers being full of hot air, thereby reducing terminal velocity to a survivable speed*

Re:I wonder... by EdIII · 2011-01-03 08:14 · Score: 5, Insightful

Yeah, because GeoHot is wrong in what he is doing?

How should he have released the key to the rest of us? We all have a sacrosanct right to own our property, and I don't give two *$#% if somebody uses it for piracy. I applaud what he has done here, and in fact, it has finally made me consider actually purchasing a PS3.

If Sony does brick all the consoles, don't blame GeoHot. Blame Sony, because they are the ones that have acted in a morally repugnant fashion for years.

Re:Peeking under the hood by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-03 08:17 · Score: 4, Funny

The random number could still be random. That's the thing with randomness... you can never tell. http://search.dilbert.com/comic/Random%20Nine

Re:PS2? by jonabbey · 2011-01-03 08:18 · Score: 5, Informative

The second generation PS3s had the PS2 graphics chip in them, but took out the Emotion Engine CPU which was run in emulation.

Later PS3s have neither the PS2 graphics chip nor the Emotion Engine CPU, and are not able to run PS2 games in emulation at all, regardless of what the firmware says.

--
- jon

Ganymede, a GPL'ed metadirectory for UNIX

Re:I wonder... by NNKK · 2011-01-03 08:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

You appear to be laboring under the assumption that the absurd ways US copyright, licensing, and contract law has been twisted apply to the rest of the world.

They do not.

Re:GeoHot did NOT find the root signing key. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-03 08:52 · Score: 5, Informative

On his website he credits those respontible. http://geohot.com/ Don't blame the other middle men. Geohot gives credit where credit is due.

Missing key by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-03 09:04 · Score: 5, Informative

Since the lame submission doesn't bother to link to the /very/ source that the article is about, I'll paste it here.

erk: C0 CE FE 84 C2 27 F7 5B D0 7A 7E B8 46 50 9F 93 B2 38 E7 70 DA CB 9F F4 A3 88 F8 12 48 2B E2 1B
riv: 47 EE 74 54 E4 77 4C C9 B8 96 0C 7B 59 F4 C1 4D
pub: C2 D4 AA F3 19 35 50 19 AF 99 D4 4E 2B 58 CA 29 25 2C 89 12 3D 11 D6 21 8F 40 B1 38 CA B2 9B 71 01 F3 AE B7 2A 97 50 19
R: 80 6E 07 8F A1 52 97 90 CE 1A AE 02 BA DD 6F AA A6 AF 74 17
n: E1 3A 7E BC 3A CC EB 1C B5 6C C8 60 FC AB DB 6A 04 8C 55 E1
K: BA 90 55 91 68 61 B9 77 ED CB ED 92 00 50 92 F6 6C 7A 3D 8D
Da: C5 B2 BF A1 A4 13 DD 16 F2 6D 31 C0 F2 ED 47 20 DC FB 06 70
~geohot
props to fail0verflow for the asymmetric half
no donate link, just use this info wisely
i do not condone piracy
if you want your next console to be secure, get in touch with me. any of you 3.
it'd be fun to be on the other side. ...and this is a real self, hello world
although it's not NPDRM, so it won't run off the hard drive
shouts to the guys who did PSL1GHT
without you, I couldn't release this

Hey by SnarfQuest · 2011-01-03 09:06 · Score: 4, Funny

Hey, that's the same combination that I have on my luggage!

--
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.

Exactly by Weaselmancer · 2011-01-03 09:33 · Score: 4, Informative

From the geohot site:

props to fail0verflow for the asymmetric half

Geohot isn't taking credit for anyone's work here.

--
Weaselmancer
rediculous.

Re:Exactly by marcansoft · 2011-01-03 11:56 · Score: 5, Informative

For the record, that wasn't there initially. We had to complain to him to get him to add that.

Re:I wonder... by an+unsound+mind · 2011-01-03 09:39 · Score: 5, Insightful

GeoHot did something Sony didn't like, and therefore Sony punished you.

Hopefully this teaches you something about buying Sony products.

Re:Don't dare give us Linux and try to take it awa by h4rr4r · 2011-01-03 09:44 · Score: 4, Insightful

No, it was their choice to do that. In no way did someone messing with the hypervisor cause the removal of the feature. To say that is like saying because my dinner was cold I had to beat my wife.

Re:no, it's still there and it still works by greg1104 · 2011-01-03 11:16 · Score: 5, Informative

To quote someone who said one correct thing today, "you really should consider making posts based upon facts". Read What difference does the firmware version make for CD and SA-CD? for an intro to the firmware issues I was speaking of. I know people who purchased the PS3 when firmware V2.00 added optical output for the format, only to find that capability taken away in the next revision. Since firmware upgrades are not optional if you want to stay on PSN, that's a clear bait and switch move. And if you read through the whole FAQ you can see some of the other limitations that come from Sony giving up on development here before the feature ever really worked perfectly.

I purchased about 20 new SACDs in 2010, from companies like Mobile Fidelity and via the SHM-SACD remasters. That gives me about 80 of them total. Since some of these are the highest quality recordings available, they get an inordinate amount of playtime here relative to the rest of my music collection.

See activity on SA-CD.net to see that many people are still actively using the format, and how many titles are available. Yes, there are probably only a few hundred people in the world impacted by Sony's SACD on PS3 decisions. That doesn't mean those people were not misled about Sony's commitment to supporting the format well in the PS3. I never claimed there were a "mountain" of such people, merely that the mechanics of how they were treated is similar to the situation with both backward compatibility and the Other OS features. This is a regularly recurring behavior from Sony.

Re:I wonder... by Lumpy · 2011-01-03 11:38 · Score: 4, Informative

News flash: clicking AGREE on a EULA does not make it enforceable. I dont care what any weazel lawyer tells you.
until the government falls, and Megacorperations rise and start hiring shadow runners to enforce their EULAS, you need to not treat them as if they are anything but a bunch of bullshit that has no more value than the insane guy on the corner screaming that the end is near.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.

I'm sick of these sorts of comments by definate · 2011-01-03 12:55 · Score: 4, Funny

I'm sick of these sorts of comments. This is Slashdot people, news for nerds. Don't make these kinds of comments!

We will not know whether or not lawyers are full of hot air enough to reduce terminal velocity to a survivable speed, until we have taken a significantly large random sample, and dropped them from planes.

I suggest we take some aspiring lawyers, and use them as our control, as I couldn't bear the thought of accidentally killing someone who isn't a lawyer.

Scientific rigour, people. Use it!

--
This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

36 of 380 comments (clear)