atreyu187
Loathsome Dung Eater
Honestly do not want to see anything done this early. It is way to early for something like this but still nice to see someone working on it in the background.
ElGris
Senior Member
Having a temperature control/monitoring at this stage of the gen could save a lot more of consoles than in previous PS models. I'm a big fan of good online gaming, I wouldn't change my mind directly to a promising new CFW though. But you know, CFW has its "good" things. Not to mention that PS5s arent't cheap, and we have production problems where in any other part of the planet you get it at >150% of over price or even more, it's not like with PS3/4 where things where much better in terms of pricing. I also saw PS5s with bga problems in almost a year, add that to the list.
atreyu187
Loathsome Dung Eater
They aren't hard to get at MSRP but does take some work. I have helped six guys here get them at MSRP for the kids. I have a hacked PS4 but truthfully I only use it for Bloodborne and Dark Souls mods. The PS4 scene is nothing like to good ole 3.41/3.55 days where we thought Sony had an impenetrable system. Which if they applied ECDSA correctly it still would not be hacked to this day. ECDSA when used properly has never been hacked/bypassed.
GuilloteTesla
Moderator
True that. An example of well implemented ECDSA is the PS3 with metldr.2 as those are still unhacked below LV2.
atreyu187
Loathsome Dung Eater
Yeah ECDSA has never been hacked unless the folks implementing it did to constant numbers or don't listen to the avoiding weak passwords.
New ecdsa keys are not likely to be obtained through breaking the ecdsa encryption any time soon even though eventually one day they might be.
Just to put this into perspective, even with a powerful PC or better a repurposed mining rig with loads of RTX 3090 or whatever high end graphic cards, if you try to bruteforce ecdsa encryption, at the computational rate of today's tech, you may have to wait for months, years, decades or centuries or more before finding a single key.
Future tech will undoubtedly break ecdsa as a matter of course but for the moment, what's available to us is not up to the task.
One would need to do the math & see what exact hashrate you would have to achieve to break ecdsa in acceptable time frames, surely many people did that already, it is high enough to keep ecdsa encryption safe for the time being, even from distributed computing attacks, in that context, it might be fun for instance to calculate what the hashing power of a very big network like ethereum could achieve in theory to help grasp the scope of the problem.
Iirc 256 bit ecdsa is basically equivalent to 128 bit AES symmetric encryption or 3072 bit RSA encryption when it comes to security strength on standard machines.
I read some time ago that it is estimated that a quantum computer would need over 2000 qubits to break a 256 bit ecdsa encryption & much more than that to break an equivalent 3072 bit RSA encryption because RSA appears to resist better to quantum computing attacks according to simulations.
At the moment the most powerful quantum computer projects being worked on must be around 100 to 200 qubits, something like that unless a better project was announced in recent months, I have not checked those things for a while.
So even there, it looks like ecdsa is still safe, at least for the next decade or so, who knows, maybe a little less or maybe substantially more, depending on progress & bumps on the road, but ecdsa seems set on a course to be made obsolete either way, it appears to be only a matter of time.
Just to put this into perspective, even with a powerful PC or better a repurposed mining rig with loads of RTX 3090 or whatever high end graphic cards, if you try to bruteforce ecdsa encryption, at the computational rate of today's tech, you may have to wait for months, years, decades or centuries or more before finding a single key.
Future tech will undoubtedly break ecdsa as a matter of course but for the moment, what's available to us is not up to the task.
One would need to do the math & see what exact hashrate you would have to achieve to break ecdsa in acceptable time frames, surely many people did that already, it is high enough to keep ecdsa encryption safe for the time being, even from distributed computing attacks, in that context, it might be fun for instance to calculate what the hashing power of a very big network like ethereum could achieve in theory to help grasp the scope of the problem.
Iirc 256 bit ecdsa is basically equivalent to 128 bit AES symmetric encryption or 3072 bit RSA encryption when it comes to security strength on standard machines.
I read some time ago that it is estimated that a quantum computer would need over 2000 qubits to break a 256 bit ecdsa encryption & much more than that to break an equivalent 3072 bit RSA encryption because RSA appears to resist better to quantum computing attacks according to simulations.
At the moment the most powerful quantum computer projects being worked on must be around 100 to 200 qubits, something like that unless a better project was announced in recent months, I have not checked those things for a while.
So even there, it looks like ecdsa is still safe, at least for the next decade or so, who knows, maybe a little less or maybe substantially more, depending on progress & bumps on the road, but ecdsa seems set on a course to be made obsolete either way, it appears to be only a matter of time.
Last edited:
danilericardo
Forum Noob
I was planning to buy one someday, but I'm actually waiting for a improved model. Good news though.
RosemaryCarter
Forum Noob
True that. An example of well implemented ECDSA is the PS3 with metldr.2 as those are still unhacked below LV2.
Last edited:
