December 14th, 2007 silverspring
Contrary to what people say about all updaters being the same, it is not true. There have been several instances of multiple releases of a firmware update. It occured with earlier updaters though recent releases have generally been identical.
Here’s a quick list, but because most sites only post a single version of an update I’ve been unable to find the alternate versions. Though I have both 2.00 updaters as you see in the list.
Im still looking for the others so if you have an eboot that does not match the following hashes let me know, specifically:
1.52 (MD5: B976783070C12C4ED81CC27785222491)
2.60 (MD5: A69A022FCE43B614A8CB305786F59855)
1.50
release:1.00:
build:89,0,3,1,0:root@psp-vsh
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p4231@updater_for_day1,v11488@updater_for_day1,20050304:
1.51
release:1.00:
build:91,0,3,1,0:root@psp-vsh
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p4389@updater_151,v12880@updater_151,20050507:
1.52
release:1.00:
build:114,0,3,1,0:root@psp-vsh
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p4505@updater_152,v13669@NA,20050602:
2.00a
release:1.00:
build:134,0,3,1,0:root@psp-vsh
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p4689@updater_200,v15800@updater_200,20050722:
2.00b
release:1.00:
build:139,0,3,1,0:root@psp-vsh
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p4689@updater_200,v16630@updater_200,20050819:
2.01
release:1.00:
build:150,0,3,1,0:root@vsh-build
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p4798@updater_201,v18571@updater_201,20050929:
2.50
release:1.00:
build:157,0,3,1,0:root@vsh-build
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p4801@updater_250,v19017@updater_250,20051011:
2.60
release:1.00:
build:170,0,3,1,0:root@vsh-build
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p4954@updater_trunk,v20338@updater_trunk,20051122:
2.70
release:1.00:
build:190,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build2
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5181@updater_270,v22592@updater_270,20060420:
2.71
release:1.00:
build:203,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build2
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5220@updater_271,v22936@updater_271,20060530:
2.80
release:1.00:
build:214,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build2
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5271@updater_280,v24380@updater_280,20060721:
2.81
release:1.00:
build:215,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build2
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5280@updater_281,v24651@updater_281,20060814:
2.82
release:1.00:
build:218,0,3,1,0:hoshi@vsh-build2
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5353@updater_282,v25795@updater_282,20061003:
3.00
release:1.00:
build:230,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build2
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5382@updater_300,v27165@updater_300,20061120:
3.01
release:1.00:
build:231,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build2
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5404@updater_301,v27257@updater_301,20061121:
3.02
release:1.00:
build:233,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build2
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5414@updater_302,v27411@updater_302,20061204:
3.03
release:1.00:
build:238,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5426@updater_303,v27632@updater_303,20061216:
3.10
release:1.00:
build:247,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5471@updater_310,v28276@updater_310,20070119:
3.11
release:1.00:
build:250,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5476@updater_311,v28775@updater_311,20070206:
3.30
release:1.00:
build:259,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5531@updater_330,v30241@updater_330,20070326:
3.40
release:1.00:
build:261,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5576@updater_340,v30701@updater_340,20070406:
3.50
release:1.00:
build:275,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5662@updater_350,v32514@updater_350,20070522:
3.51
release:1.00:
build:278,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5724@updater_351,v33285@updater_351,20070628:
3.52
release:1.00:
build:279,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5742@updater_352,v33536@updater_352,20070710:
3.70
release:1.00:
build:290,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5840@updater_370,v35316@updater_370,20070831:
3.71
release:1.00:
build:291,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5864@updater_371,v35671@updater_371,20070912:
3.72
release:1.00:
build:295,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5876@updater_372,v36347@updater_372,20071015:
3.73
release:1.00:
build:298,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5928@updater_373,v37903@updater_373,20071121:
3.80
release:1.00:
build:303,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5933@updater_380,v38389@updater_380,20071210:
3.90
release:1.00:
build:310,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5940@updater_390,v38984@updater_390,20080125:
3.93
release:1.00:
build:313,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p5989@updater_393,v39469@updater_393,20080215:
3.95
release:1.00:
build:318,0,3,1,0:builder@vsh-build5
system:17756@release_103a,0×01000300:
vsh:p6004@updater_395,v40308@updater_395,20080328:
EDIT: added 3.80, added 3.90, added 3.93, added 3.95
Note: there were two releases of the 3.93 EBOOT however the app itself stayed the same so there’s only one version listed. There were only minor changes to the packaging of the EBOOT, an extra 0×1000 null bytes for the PBP Header, and an extra 0×10 byte hash added to the end of the PSAR. Strangely enough, the extra 0×1000 bytes were taken out again for 3.95.
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
December 2nd, 2007 silverspring
We are all familiar with the various tricks SCE use to fool devs, though I recently came across one that has annoyed me the most.
When 3.40 was released, a ‘special’ prx was flashed with the rest of the firmware that didnt seem to be used at all. It was special in that not only was it not used nor referred to once in the entire firmware, it also could NOT be decrypted (the keys to decrypt it simply did not exist in the firmware). Because of this and the fact that the prx was promptly removed from all future firmware (it only exists in 3.40) it was assumed to be a remnant of a debug prx used during testing and they had simply forgot to remove it. Or was it?
The prx was “idcheck.prx”. The module name sounded interesting and on first glance it was assumed to be the debug version of the embedded prx SCE hid in 3.30+ updaters to check for corrupt idstorage in their updaters (the one that refuses to update the PSP if either your keys 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 were corrupt).
Long story short, the prx has been decrypted and the result was far from expected. It seems that the original module has been taken out and replaced with a dummy instead. The only remains left of the original module was the module name “sceIdCheck” and the data segment, which included the strings “Illegal idstoarge” (SCE always misspell ‘idstorage’), “flash is corrupted”, and “cannot restore PSP system”. The rest of the module (including all the code) had been dummied with another module from the firmware.
Now why would SCE do this? If it were a debug prx that was accidently left in, why would they bother going to the trouble of dummying the code?
Some accidental mistake on their part, or more of their ridiculous mind games at play……
Posted in Misc, Uncategorized | No Comments »
November 16th, 2007 silverspring
Cracked a few very interesting nids the other day. More proof that the HDD wasnt just a rumour.
- 0xc68f1573 sceSysconCtrlGSensor
- 0x3ab3aeef sceSysconReadGSensorReg
- 0x07a0c260 sceSysconWriteGSensorReg
- 0x72eda9af sceSysconGetGSensorVersion
- 0x58531e69 sceSysconSetGSensorCallback
The G-Sensor is already used on Sony’s Vaio laptop and also their HDD based Walkman’s. To quote Sony:
The innovative G-Sensor system automatically and instantly reacts to changes in gravity and velocity by releasing the recording head. This helps protect the hard disk surface, preventing crashes and loss of data, ultimately improving long term reliability.
These new nids along with the new HDD nids cracked just last week provides pretty conclusive proof that the PSP Slim does in fact natively support a HDD.
- 0x8b95c17f sceSysregAtahddIoEnable
- 0xccf911c0 sceSysregAtahddIoDisable
- 0xa23bc2c4 sceSysregAtahddResetEnable
- 0xf5ea8570 sceSysregAtahddResetDisable
- 0x8ce2f97a sceSysregAtahddClkSelect
- 0xb59db832 sceSysregAtahddClkEnable
- 0x9155812C sceSysregAtahddClkDisable
- 0xe45bed6a sceSysregAtahddBusClockEnable
- 0x681b35c4 sceSysregAtahddBusClockDisable
- 0xa975f224 sceSysconCtrlHddPower
- 0x051186F3 sceSysconGetHddPowerCtrl
- 0xF9FDAFA5 sceSysconGetHddPowerStatus
- 0x04EEFD03 sceSysconSetHddPowerCallback
This along with the (also missing) Bluetooth features (sceSysconCtrlBtPower etc.) could’ve made the PSP Slim a very attractive handheld indeed. What you are left with instead is a slightly ‘slimmer’, ‘lighter’ model with very ordinary additions (TV out, USB charge, UMD cache, larger flash space etc).
So why did Sony decide in the end to skimp on these features (Im sure there’s a few more features still hidden – there’s still about 20 more syscon nids that havent been cracked yet). Well the two main factors are a) battery life (the slim battery is already at a lower capacity than the fat) and b) cost (the slim was released at the same price as the current fat).
So even though these are dream features to have on a PSP (and in fact these features are still supported natively on a HW level – just need to connect the HDD and write the drivers for it) could you justify the sacrifice in battery life and increase in purchase price to have these features?
Posted in NID's | 6 Comments »