firmware source?

[sunrise_phil]

Has any firmware source been released that relates to the xbox360?
I have an interest in creating my own modified firmware but need the right tools.
Any help?

[Arakon]

uhm.. the firmware sources will be locked in a safe in a vault below the companies that wrote them.

[sunrise_phil]

uhm.. the firmware sources will be locked in a safe in a vault below the companies that wrote them.

thanks for the reply.
Ok let me ask this another way.I have dis8051 original benq firmware and cfw(ixtreme) and have done a comparison.obviously this is all in assembly.
My question is does C4eva and their team write the source in assembly or C#/C+.It will take a lot longer for me to write something in assembly to catch up with modified firmwares out already but if the source(of modified fw) is in another language that could be very useful(being released) to the scene as a whole even if it were a very old version modified fw.

[majinsoftware]

Its in assembly, And I doubt C4eva would give you a copy.

[jelle2503]

why would you try make a firmware if there's someone else doing it for the last 3 years who knows the drill?

if you do make one you might as well ring Microsoft and request a ban for your Xbox 360 right away ^^

[sunrise_phil]

why would you try make a firmware if there's someone else doing it for the last 3 years who knows the drill?

if you do make one you might as well ring Microsoft and request a ban for your Xbox 360 right away ^^

I think you are missing the point about the recent bans.I hate to say this but if EVERYONE is using c4eva firmware then it makes it incredibly easy for MS to detect,as we have to assume that they can in fact detect the firmware.Isnt it also a bit lazy to just keep relying on the same person/team if you beleieve they are not going in the right direction with regards to future firmware?

I would rather take my chances with my own home made firmware than someone elses code.
I in no way criticise the ixtreme team as they have been fantastic but I do think they are now heading in the wrong direction re lite touch.

[Arakon]

and what makes you think that MS wouldn't notice another firmware just as easily? aside from the fact that it's unlikely that they are detecting the firmware directly, it would be just as "incredibly easy" to detect ANY difference in the firmwares from the ones they officially put on there.

[sunrise_phil]

and what makes you think that MS wouldn't notice another firmware just as easily? aside from the fact that it's unlikely that they are detecting the firmware directly, it would be just as "incredibly easy" to detect ANY difference in the firmwares from the ones they officially put on there.

Doesnt that make ALL firmwares that do not match the originals instantly bannable including the lite touch on the assumption that they can detect the fw directly,making the whole softmod thing obsolete?
On the assumption that they are indirectly detecting modified fw arent all fw writers * in the wind re possible banning until we know exactly what MS are detecting?
What about self modifying code-I know that used to be a taboo subject but I am getting on a bit and still remember.

[sunrise_phil]

Its in assembly, And I doubt C4eva would give you a copy.

Erm.If its in assembly I dont need it.

[biaz]

You could do a quick compare with orig hitachi firmware, and the first c4e firmwares released. That would give you a good overview of how it is patched, basically. Then you could compare each following version with the previous, read the release notes and figure out how they implemented the new features.

I would personally love to have a LiteOn firmware without stealth. If im already banned, then what's the point of using activate.iso and locking out bad-stealth backups?

[sunrise_phil]

You could do a quick compare with orig hitachi firmware, and the first c4e firmwares released. That would give you a good overview of how it is patched, basically. Then you could compare each following version with the previous, read the release notes and figure out how they implemented the new features.

I would personally love to have a LiteOn firmware without stealth. If im already banned, then what's the point of using activate.iso and locking out bad-stealth backups?

Good thinking on the original hitachi fw comparison.I have 3 banned consoles within the last 4 days so same as you would be better having a non stealth liteon fw than light touch that I cant use!
Definitely will be looking into writing a firmware.thanks for all responses.

[sunrise_phil]

and what makes you think that MS wouldn't notice another firmware just as easily? aside from the fact that it's unlikely that they are detecting the firmware directly, it would be just as "incredibly easy" to detect ANY difference in the firmwares from the ones they officially put on there.

just a thought but if they can only indirectly detect differences then surely the less "differences" the better.From my analysis modern ixtreme fw has a lot of differences-presumably why c4eva is working on light touch to have a much smaller footprint.I still think it needs a completely different approach and we have to assume MS can read the firmware.Sounds impossible to write a fw without any differences doesnt it but I have some ideas.

[le_uberfry]

Considering you can upload code to the Hitachi, I wouldn't count on being able to stay undetected.
Samsung firmware can even return any sector at will (possible to trick).
Wanna block the code execution? Banned. Wanna keep them from reading fw? Banned.
Returning a single bit that'll make their crc mismatch? Banned.
Reading the firmware is no biggie, just use dual-flash and solder A18 to the other piece, but uploading code on the other hand would at least require you to go back and forth between both firmwares - and THAT'S a difficult task. Hell, they could just try reading the second rom and you'd be f***ed too.

But just one question - why don't you just use originals with an original firmware on XBL?
I mean don't get me wrong, I'm all for the cat-and-mouse game, but there's a difference between a challenge and just being plain cheap. I can smell the latter being your problem

[sunrise_phil]

Considering you can upload code to the Hitachi, I wouldn't count on being able to stay undetected.
Samsung firmware can even return any sector at will (possible to trick).
Wanna block the code execution? Banned. Wanna keep them from reading fw? Banned.
Returning a single bit that'll make their crc mismatch? Banned.
Reading the firmware is no biggie, just use dual-flash and solder A18 to the other piece, but uploading code on the other hand would at least require you to go back and forth between both firmwares - and THAT'S a difficult task. Hell, they could just try reading the second rom and you'd be f***ed too.

But just one question - why don't you just use originals with an original firmware on XBL?
I mean don't get me wrong, I'm all for the cat-and-mouse game, but there's a difference between a challenge and just being plain cheap. I can smell the latter being your problem

yeh with 3 banned ixtreme xboxs I am a bit cash strapped lol.I am in it for the challenge and more for knowledge,anyone can write software in C,java etc but I always preferred low level assembly so this firmware thing is interesting.
Not sure you got the point of doing a liteon non stealth for those that have been banned though.Your post seems a little bit negative ie try this-banned etc.

btw hows your job working out lol.

[le_uberfry]

http://www.xboxhacker.net/index.php?topic=2843.0

My job? Not going to comment on that one

[sunrise_phil]

http://www.xboxhacker.net/index.php?topic=2843.0

My job? Not going to comment on that one

yeah read tiros stuff.Erm not to be rude but I am not looking to rip someone elses code off.I have already done comparisons etc and done my own research into possible actions.If ixtreme is flawed then so would anyones firmware be using this method.