Is there any way to breake the region code???

[Hotzero]

Hello every body

I bought Ace compat 6 before 5 days but it was NTSC and my Xbox is Elite PAL. I trid to return it to the store but the owner refused and the game was original and I bought it by 50$ which is expensive in my country.

Is there any way to make the game or to break the region code for any one ( I mean the console or th CD of the game)

And can a mod chip break the region code? if it dose, please tell the kinds of the mod chip and how to put it inside the console??




 

[caster420]

No.

[lexie]

you can change the region of your xbox 360 though...but its really, really hard

[Moon666]

Its Possible th Change the Region of the 360 with a Infectus Modchip and a TA Addon Board.
You need to Downgrade your Kerner first, then you can boot Linux and change der Region to NTSC.

www.infectus.biz

greetz Moon666

[Arakon]

..which doesn't work in any model sold in the past months or any repaired model anymore. it's NOT an alternative really worth considering anymore, especially since you can only change the region, not make the console region free.

[cory1492]

If one actually wanted to break the region code (as opposed to change it), I don't see why you couldn't. But there are better ways to break a 360 (like use it until you get RLoD.) 

[n00bpwner360]

You could break the region code if you could crack RSA 2048 encryption I believe right? Isn't that what XEX headers are signed with?

[Arakon]

sure. but that won't happen. it never happened for xbox 1 either for that matter, and that's "only" a 1024 bit encryption.

[n00bpwner360]

I have always had this dream of me hitting the lottery and buying upwards of 10 computers or so centered around one of these CPUs.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103249
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115051

Arakon, you seem like a knowledgeable guy, how long would it take for 20 computers running either the Intel or AMD CPUs I just showed you and some type of cluster Linux rig up to crack 2048 RSA?

Because I will do this...just need to hit the lottery first...and learn how to write my own RSA hash cracking program....

[lexie]

wikipedia says that 2048bit RSA = 112 symmetric bit encryption = 2^112 = 5.19229686 × 10^33 possible keys...

[Arakon]

let's put it this way: if you are really lucky, your great-great-great-grandchildren may get the correct key.

[n00bpwner360]

OK if there are 10^33 possible keys...how long does it take to compute just 1 key? Like a very short amount of time? I have screwed around with Cain and Abel and cracked some MD5 hashes and my crappy computer did like O jeez IDK...like a couple of hundred passes a second, so is it like that with RSA 2048?

Or does it take a couple of seconds to compute just 1 RSA 2048 hash?

[ImmortalZ]

First, expand this :

5.19229686 × 10^33

Then, consider that you can calculate and compare a million RSSA2048 keys per second using your oh-so-powerful cluster.

Try dividing the number about with 1 million to get how many seconds it will take. Divide by 60 for minutes, another 60 for hours, 24 for days and 365 for years.

Then shake your head slowly and abandon the idea.

[n00bpwner360]

Damn it.

What hashes does the kernel use? RSA or SHA? Somehwere I read SHA-1. Is SHA-1 easier to crack than RSA? Because if we can't crack the game hashes, we can crack and modify the kernel to not give a $#!t about the game hashes and then we can freely modify games w/o worriying about breaking the hashes.

[lexie]

if you just think for a minute, ms probably will use hashes that are not breakable at the moment by brute force, so i dont think its an option the break the hashes of the kernel

[n00bpwner360]

It might be. You don't know.

Why don't they sign firmware files? I just thought of that. No need for epoxy around chips, no need for any expensive $#!t like the embedded flash rom or w/e inside of the controller chips on the new Philips drives....

Just sign the files so we can't change $#!t...they did that to XEX header files and we can't do jack $#!t...why didn't they do that to the firmware flashes.

[Arakon]

cause then the drive itself would have to contain a public key and do the decrypting etc. MS wanted to save cost by using standard PC components.

[Tiros]

It might be. You don't know.

Why don't they sign firmware files? I just thought of that. No need for epoxy around chips, no need for any expensive $#!t like the embedded flash rom or w/e inside of the controller chips on the new Philips drives....

Just sign the files so we can't change $#!t...they did that to XEX header files and we can't do jack $#!t...why didn't they do that to the firmware flashes.

Since previously the dvd  flash is external , the signature check could simply be removed.
See the Lite-On thread for how this has changed.

[safety]

well.. 5.19229686 × 10^33 is just too big number for now. And when it will not be that big, it won't mather.

Other problem with RSA, is that -as far as my knowledge expands, but please PROVE I'm wrong- it has NO known mathematical weaknes.

About brute force, its like a needle in the haystack.
One might be lucky enough to "guess" with bruteforce at the first hit. Yup, could happen LOL.. But will not happen, thats allmost sure.

Some guys wanted to do a project simular to folding home, but -for some *strange* reason- have quit the project when they made a databse out of the possible keys..

Think of it, a list of ALL possible keys would be a LOT Gbytes in size, and those are just the keys them self..
Nothing in the world can process that amount of data..

With 1 million computers, each working allways, and each doing 1 milion check every secund, it would take
5.19229686 × 10^21 secunds..
One year is 31536000 secunds..

It would still take quite a few years to complete.. Yeah, 50% that the right key is to be found at 50% of the process, and so on,
but is still quite more than impossible..

If it would have some sorthof mathematical weakness it would still be quite un-managable..
Even the square root of that big fat number is much larger than anyone could imagine.

[torne]

Cracking RSA is not quite a brute-force search, nor does the big number quite reflect how difficult it is (though it's still that general order of magnitude *grin*). There are no known weaknesses in RSA, nor are there likely to be any unknown ones, for one simple reason: it's a really trivial algorithm. Unlike symmetric-key crypto algorithms RSA does not need to be complicated, or need to have any features to resist brute force attacks - its security depends on one simple mathematical fact: we have not discovered a way to factorise very large numbers efficiently (and it is theorised that such a method does not exist, though this has yet to be proven: see the question of whether the complexity classes P and NP are equal or not).

If we suddenly discover a way to factorise huge numbers quickly, then all RSA crypto everywhere will be broken. Current theories indicate this is only possible via quantum computing. The most efficient ways to factorise huge numbers we've found so far on regular computers can't be distributed easily, either: having a million computers doing it is not really a great deal of help because algorithms like the large-scale GNFS require that each processor involved in the computation have very fast access to an extremely large amount of shared memory - this is not possible for a bunch of random people's computers over the internet, and the result will be slower than naive methods (what this thread has referred to as "brute force").

So.. if you have a lab somewhere with a tightly coupled supercomputer that can run GNFS efficiently then you might be able to break it in a reasonably large number of years (not sure what the state of the art is here, but I'd guess a decade as a minimum *grin*); trying to do it with spare CPU cycles of a bunch of people over the internet we are back to the "millenia" timescale.