12-08-2010 #11Warrorar Guest
nice one, i hope you will improve it and make it more better
12-08-2010 #12ben2005 Guest
deanrr was just looking at the code, he didn't test it personally..
12-08-2010 #13n4ru Guest
To clear up some confusion for those who don't understand where to put their dev_flash:
X:\cfw\dev_flash <- Place all files from dev_flash here
X:\cfw\dev_flash\cfw <- Empty folder needed for removing the CFW so you don't have to restart the PS3 to test multiple times.
I will eventually just run a recursive search for a dev_flash folder on any device (except dev_flash itself).
12-08-2010 #14modmate GuestLOL at the suggestion that my app could brick a console. Try not to make stuff up when posting, especially when you don't know what you're talking about.
I have a PS3, I've even posted a small library for it already and a few other apps. I simply don't have access to mine until Monday. Don't make baseless assumptions.
Anyway, apps should run at least ONCE before make it public. I don't know any dev who give stuff to public without testing!
And one last thing, i respect your work and efford but test it anyway next time.
12-08-2010 #15n4ru Guest
We don't even have permanent write access to the PS3's firmware right now, I couldn't write a bricking app if I tried.
Obviously I'd have tested it if I had the chance, but I don't until monday. The source is extremely simple, it should work anyway, so I see no problem in releasing it.
12-08-2010 #16modmate Guest
I wouldn't release toilet paper before i test it myself. Seriously , even if it's simple and could not brick something you need to verify your app before release.
12-08-2010 #17deank Guest
The problem was that if you use PL3 to redirect /dev_flash to /1234_456 you also get /dev_flash2 and /dev_flash3 redirected to /1234_456.
It is possible that the payload I was using had issues (I reverted to hermes4b) but one flavor of the PL3 implementation didn't work as expected.
I mean it WORKED by replacing the table and /dev_flash with the new path, but one has to take care for other flashes because they share the SAME names (up to the 2/3).
12-08-2010 #18cfwprophet Guest
Hmmm... nice one... but i can smell something that maybe in near - near future we will not need this CFW/USB/Firm loaders any more.
Could be a hacked installable .pup.
12-08-2010 #19PSPSwampy Guest
Isn't this simply a case of the string that is being matched?
If the syscall used to replace the path isn't specific enough then "/dev_flash" could match with "/dev_flash", "/dev_flash2" and "/dev_flash3" (Proof of this would be if you replaced "/dev_flash" with "/test" and found that flash 2 ended up being "/test2")
So surely the all round solution would be to replace the path "/dev_flash/" as it is more specific and would only match with "/dev_flash/" - it won't match with "/dev_flash2/" ?
Maybe i just missed the point entirely - but being a windows programmer i wouldn't be at all suprised!
(I'm assuming the syscall usage is kinda like a string Replacement) ?
p.s. That is of course assuming /" isn't some kind of escape character!
12-08-2010 #20n4ru Guest
Originally Posted by KaKaRoToKS