AfterDawn: News

PlayStation 3 is a great asset to hackers

Security-Assessment.com security consultant Nick Breese has presented a new report to the Kiwicon hacker conference in which he claims the Sony PlayStation 3, with its powerful Cell processors, can be a great asset to hackers.

He claims that the console can crack passwords at speeds 300 times faster than Intel hardware can.



Speed is the most important factor in "brute force" password cracking, and Breese says the PS3 helps cut down speed considerably.

"Suddenly we have a massive increase in terms of . . . cryptography cracking," he said. "Eight-character 'strong' passwords can be broken in a couple of days whereas before it would take weeks."

Breese does note howevwer, that other password types are handled more securely and remain unaffected by Breese's findings.

"They're still safe. However, the gap has shrunk a hell of a lot," he added. "If you had access to a thousand PlayStations you could (still) crack an eight-character Linux password in a few days."

The PS3 can also be used to "break basic encryption schemes" added Breese, although "ciphers such as the 128-bit Secure Sockets Layer (SSL)" are safe for the time being. "It'll speed up the attacks but I can't see that it's broken, (It) is still safe because the people implementing the ciphers foresaw CPU power rapidly increasing."

To conclude his findings, Breese hopes that the report will encourage software-makers to increase their password security. "That's the reason I'm doing this," he says.

Source:
TheAge

Written by: Andre Yoskowitz @ 28 Nov 2007 17:59

• Previous article

• MainConcept AG licenses transcoding applications to Panasonic

• Next article

• U.S. holiday shoppers prefer LCD to Plasma

• 48 comments

• rainofire

  So, if they crack the PS3's, does this mean that the PS3 will pose a threat to security. W O W

  29.11.2007 02:42 #1

• sk8flawzz

  yeah its true
  cracked my old password in just under 9 hours..
  jk
  this should be fun

  29.11.2007 02:45 #2

• kingy1213

  where would one get that type of softwere?

  29.11.2007 02:57 #3

• sk8flawzz

  can't really tell you
  its all run on linux i believe, which is only possible if you mod your PS3

  29.11.2007 03:01 #4

• 7thsinger

  Originally posted by kingy1213: where would one get that type of softwere?Not gonna tell ;)
  
  You aspiring hacker you.

  29.11.2007 08:34 #5

• spydah

  Ah a new feature for the PS3 shaweeeet.

  29.11.2007 09:58 #6

• goodswipe

  Originally posted by kingy1213: where would one get that type of softwere?simple, there all over the net or, you could just make some batch files and include 10000+ pw in the file but, like sk8flawz was saying, to ultimately do this the proper way you would need linux as your os. Then you gotta mod your ps3 to run linux, I don't know what kernel would run on that...anyone??

  29.11.2007 10:45 #7

• iamgq

  PS3 a super hack machine? Somebody hack it to time trable, now theres a challenge.

  29.11.2007 11:12 #8

• dan9408

  You dont need to mod your ps3 , sony has there own other os installer , and there own yellow dog linux. So NO you dont need to mod your ps3. google yellow dog linux and burn it to a disk. It then on your behalf partitions 10gb(i think) to the linux os. Fedora even runs on PS3. There are even special hacking team devoted to cracking the other os installer from sony to install ad run their own code e.g.playing backed up iso. There is not yet a iso loader but in the future who knows ??

  29.11.2007 11:19 #9

• goodswipe

  well yea, that software was solely developed for the ps3 as well as other platforms but, to get any other distro of linux onto the ps3 one would need to mod there ps3?

  29.11.2007 11:39 #10

• dan9408

  There is no mod involved , sony dont do mods just see the psp for that , this is fine see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3#Linux
  . A piece from wikipedia....
  
  "Sony has included an option in the XMB menu to install other operating systems.[121] Among other Linux distributions, Ubuntu, Fedora 8, Gentoo, Debian, and Yellow Dog have been run on the PS3.[122][123][124][125]
  
  Sony currently implements a hypervisor restricting RSX access,[126] though the graphics are fast enough for emulation of some old systems. Linux has access to 6 of the 7 SPEs, and IBM provides an introduction to programming parallel applications on the PlayStation 3.
  
  As of Linux kernel 2.6.21, the PlayStation 3 has official Linux support and does not require any special patching to function. An up to date Linux kernel source with all the latest PlayStation 3 bug fixes and improvements is listed here; and a frequently updated user friendly build (currently based on the Linux kernel 2.6.23) is also available.
  “ Because we have plans for having Linux on board the PS3, we also recognize Linux programming activities… Other than game studios tied to official developer licenses, we had like to see various individuals participate in content creation for the PS3."
  
  The bold speech is by a guy working at sony !!.
  
  Currently the ps3 runs ubuntu, Fedora 8, Gentoo, Debian, and Yellow Dog. Off my mid those are all i can think of.
  

  Many people like breakfast in bed so i say why not just sleep in the kitchen :-)

  29.11.2007 11:52 #11

• goodswipe

  ahh, that's cool i did not no that sony had that feature (other os) on there. heh, i'm not a ps3 owner. i wonder though...is there kernel support for redhat or sles on there?

  29.11.2007 11:57 #12

• tavek

  ROFL, this in an analogy is like a HOOKER conferance saying Condoms have increased thier(the hookers) sales by 300%
  
  This just keeps getting better!

  29.11.2007 12:04 #13

• vinny13

  Ya the PS3 can hack others but others can't hack the PS3 >:(

  29.11.2007 12:56 #14

• goodswipe

  step into my office vinny...you're fired!
  
  lol

  29.11.2007 16:26 #15

• GrayMule

  Originally posted by sk8flawzz: yeah its true
  cracked my old password in just under 9 hours..
  jk
  this should be funactually that's pretty sad if it took you 9 hours to crack your own password that you already knew!!!

  29.11.2007 23:51 #16

• hermes_vb

  It would be nice if they used it to crack the Blue Ray protection scheme. That would be ironic (and sweet).

  30.11.2007 01:05 #17

• chaos_zzz

  Originally posted by rainofire: So, if they crack the PS3's, does this mean that the PS3 will pose a threat to security. W O W
  LOl if it becomes a treath, SOny will be bombed Lol
  
  nah the ps3 is the best console of course a lot of stuff will be developed for it like it happenede with the psp cuz sony stuff can actually deal with this creativity.
  
  and security is always getting better so it think its to hard for simple ppl to break i think that a "real" hacker must hav this $10 000 computer wich is proably faster than a ps3.
  cuz he has already made a lot of money. hey why r we talking about a he it could be a she? why can´t we picture a hacker as woman as a fisrt ttought funny eh..

  30.11.2007 11:15 #18

• maitland

  Originally posted by dan9408: You dont need to mod your ps3 , sony has there own other os installer , and there own yellow dog linux. So NO you dont need to mod your ps3. google yellow dog linux and burn it to a disk. It then on your behalf partitions 10gb(i think) to the linux os. Fedora even runs on PS3. There are even special hacking team devoted to cracking the other os installer from sony to install ad run their own code e.g.playing backed up iso. There is not yet a iso loader but in the future who knows ??You can also install ubuntu (prolly the most user friendly linux); or if you are daring, you can install gentoo.

  1.12.2007 14:28 #19

• maitland

  It would be so ironic to use a cluster of PS3s to crack HDCP.

  1.12.2007 14:57 #20

• veyron

  Quote:Originally posted by kingy1213: where would one get that type of softwere?Not gonna tell ;)
  
  You aspiring hacker you.lol!

  3.12.2007 02:23 #21

• ZippyDSM

  stupid Q but couldn't a 700$ quadcore PC with 2GB ramm do the same with linux?
  
  or is it the point its the cheapest hack tool available?

  3.12.2007 02:56 #22

• maitland

  Originally posted by ZippyDSM: stupid Q but couldn't a 700$ quadcore PC with 2GB ramm do the same with linux?
  
  or is it the point its the cheapest hack tool available?That isn't a stupid question at all.
  
  I have a somewhat limited understanding of parallel processing, but I believe the following is correct (somebody correct me if I'm wrong):
  
  The cell processor is optimized to perform the same operation on multiple pieces of data at the same time.
  
  A quadcore PC is more general purpose. All 4 cores could potentially be running different threads or working on the same problem. They aren't optimized to be working on the same problem all at once like the cell is.
  
  Since cracking a code basically requires doing the same operation ad nauseum, the cell is better suited to the task.
  
  The amount of RAM, in this case really doesn't make much difference.

  3.12.2007 03:16 #23

• ZippyDSM

  Quote:Originally posted by ZippyDSM: stupid Q but couldn't a 700$ quadcore PC with 2GB ramm do the same with linux?
  
  or is it the point its the cheapest hack tool available?That isn't a stupid question at all.
  
  I have a somewhat limited understanding of parallel processing, but I believe the following is correct (somebody correct me if I'm wrong):
  
  The cell processor is optimized to perform the same operation on multiple pieces of data at the same time.
  
  A quadcore PC is more general purpose. All 4 cores could potentially be running different threads or working on the same problem. They aren't optimized to be working on the same problem all at once like the cell is.
  
  Since cracking a code basically requires doing the same operation ad nauseum, the cell is better suited to the task.
  
  The amount of RAM, in this case really doesn't make much difference.2GB o ramm is cheap 2 GBof DR 2 are going for 50-70$ and some of thats is 4-4-4-15!
  (on a side note is 1 2GB stick of 4-4-4 12 worth 120$ or would 4-4-4-15 be as good?
  I am moving to a e6600!(got it for 150$ :P) from a 939 3700+ and a P4 945)
  
  ya but with out the software/OS behind the CPU whatever features are available mean nothing, but I see what you are saying with the right software its easier to run circles around consumer class PCs for soem things.
  
  Now only if they can only hack games to get them to run better :P

  3.12.2007 03:23 #24

• maitland

  Actually, that wasn't exactly what I meant.
  
  The cell processor has 8 cores, right? But they are all controlled by one PPC64 (aka G5) processor. It can tell them all 8 to do the same thing at once just on different chunks of the same data, or it can tell half of them to do one thing and half to do the other. It is really fast at doing that because it is all coordinated by the one master processor issuing the instructions, and that is what it's built to do.
  
  With a quad core x86_64/amd64 there is no dedicated master, it just runs multiple threads as scheduled by the operating system. So, they can all be working on the same data at once just like the cell, but since it is controlled by software, it's not as optimized for that purpose. The x86_64's would beat the pants off a Cell at multitasking, though.
  
  haha as for your ram question, I'm not really certain... I should've listened closer in Computer Architecture class. (I still got an A-, and i have no idea about RAM timing... hmmm...)

  3.12.2007 03:46 #25

• keiram

  im new here does anyone now where to download ps2 games

  3.12.2007 04:09 #26

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by maitland: Actually, that wasn't exactly what I meant.
  
  The cell processor has 8 cores, right? But they are all controlled by one PPC64 (aka G5) processor. It can tell them all 8 to do the same thing at once just on different chunks of the same data, or it can tell half of them to do one thing and half to do the other. It is really fast at doing that because it is all coordinated by the one master processor issuing the instructions, and that is what it's built to do.
  
  With a quad core x86_64/amd64 there is no dedicated master, it just runs multiple threads as scheduled by the operating system. So, they can all be working on the same data at once just like the cell, but since it is controlled by software, it's not as optimized for that purpose. The x86_64's would beat the pants off a Cell at multitasking, though.
  
  haha as for your ram question, I'm not really certain... I should've listened closer in Computer Architecture class. (I still got an A-, and i have no idea about RAM timing... hmmm...)AH! so thats the big diffrance in the Cell, that makes alot of things clearer! (and whycurrent 2 and 4 X core models need to die and be replaced with soemthing the OS and apps can really use.)
  
  DOH got the timings a bit off, 5-5-5-12 or 4-4-4-15,anyway I can get 4GB of the slower or 2GB of the faster for about 120-130.
  
  From my past experience with ramm more is better than timing when they are that close.
  
  So I ave a question for you, I've been on a 939 3700+ for the past 2 years built a P4 dual core 3.0 mmm 945 is the model I think ran about 30% faster,I built it with 2GB 800Mhz ramm on a asrock 4core sata 2for a friend for Xmas, what kind of performance jump should I see, another 30% over the P4?
  
  sigh I know what the main bottle neck for it,I got 2 of thos asrock boards...its a good starting board at least but the 677mhz mem cap sucks.

  3.12.2007 04:11 #27

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by keiram: im new here does anyone now where to download ps2 gamesremove question and do not ask again not, or meet teh ban stick!
  
  
  

  For all the console/game fanboys out their.
  http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles...Console-Rundown
  Oh god I can't stop laughing!!!

  3.12.2007 04:13 #28

• keiram

  eih fuck you man

  3.12.2007 04:42 #29

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by keiram: eih fuck you man
  Dude understand the rules, you can't ask thos questions here in the "open" without being banded or warned.
  
  This isnot hat kind of site, now if you have gray area questions on how to get backups "you made" workignwe can help.
  ^^
  
  I suggest you remove both comments before a mod comes and nukes you ,thank you for your time!

  3.12.2007 04:49 #30

• maitland

  Zippy sez:
  
  Quote:
  AH! so thats the big diffrance in the Cell, that makes alot of things clearer! (and whycurrent 2 and 4 X core models need to die and be replaced with soemthing the OS and apps can really use.)
  Well, there are a lot of ways to think about the problem of increasing computing power.
  
  For the Cell processor, it makes sense to optimize for working on one or two problems at the same time. That's because in video games the processor is typically working on the same problem from many different angles (calculating collisions between flying bullets and baddies and what-have-you).
  
  However, for a general purpose computer, it's just that, general purpose. So, they need to make it work on a wide range of applications. For instance, you have heard, no doubt, of the various SSE instruction sets. These make use of multiple cores in much the same way as the Cell does (Single in Multiple Data or SIMD). But these cores can also work more or less independently from each other, if need be.
  
  It's not really that either one is better; it's just that the Cell is more specialized and the x86_64's are more generalized.
  
  --
  
  I've been experimenting with a completely radical concept, though. You can multiply and divide more or less instantly in the analog domain, so why not have a processor that can convert to analog and do the calculation in a single clock cycle and then convert back to digital to store the result...!
  
  Of course, this would not be as precise as a digital calculation, but it would be much faster. Digital multiplications and divisions typically take several clock cycles, so you could save those for the really critical tasks like keeping the OS stable, and use analog calculations to do the flying bullets and baddies in a video game or whatever that isn't gonna break the system if it is off by a bit or so.
  
  
  Zippy continues:
  
  Quote:
  DOH got the timings a bit off, 5-5-5-12 or 4-4-4-15,anyway I can get 4GB of the slower or 2GB of the faster for about 120-130.
  
  From my past experience with ramm more is better than timing when they are that close.
  
  So I ave a question for you, I've been on a 939 3700+ for the past 2 years built a P4 dual core 3.0 mmm 945 is the model I think ran about 30% faster,I built it with 2GB 800Mhz ramm on a asrock 4core sata 2for a friend for Xmas, what kind of performance jump should I see, another 30% over the P4?
  
  sigh I know what the main bottle neck for it,I got 2 of thos asrock boards...its a good starting board at least but the 677mhz mem cap sucks.It's really impossible to say whether it would be 30% faster without knowing what yours and your friends applications typically are. Even then, it would be better just to test it than to speculate.
  
  As for your speed versus size issue, that is another area where you really need to determine what is more important to you to make a valid decision.
  
  Also, if you can put the 4 gigs in a dual channel configuration, you might get better performance (depending on the application) than if you had 2 gigs with lower latency but they were only configured on one channel.
  
  god I'm rambling my ass off now hahaha

  3.12.2007 05:02 #31

• maitland

  @keiram:
  
  Surely you can find what you seek with only a modicum of effort. I suggest you read some and then type some of the things you read into a search engine and press enter. At such time, you will indubitably be close to your mark.

  3.12.2007 05:22 #32

• ZippyDSM

  Quote:Zippy sez:
  
  Quote:
  AH! so thats the big diffrance in the Cell, that makes alot of things clearer! (and whycurrent 2 and 4 X core models need to die and be replaced with soemthing the OS and apps can really use.)
  Well, there are a lot of ways to think about the problem of increasing computing power.
  
  For the Cell processor, it makes sense to optimize for working on one or two problems at the same time. That's because in video games the processor is typically working on the same problem from ma ny different angles (calculating collisions between flying bullets and baddies and what-have-you).
  
  However, for a general purpose computer, it's just that, general purpose. So, they need to make it work on a wide range of applications. For instance, you have heard, no doubt, of the various SSE instruction sets. These make use of multiple cores in much the same way as the Cell does (Single in Multiple Data or SIMD). But these cores can also work more or less independently from each other, if need be.
  
  It's not really that either one is better; it's just that the Cell is more specialized and the x86_64's are more generalized.
  
  --
  
  I've been experimenting with a completely radical concept, though. You can multiply and divide more or less instantly in the analog domain, so why not have a processor that can convert to analog and do the calculation in a single clock cycle and then convert back to digital to store the result...!
  
  Of course, this would not be as precise as a digital calculation, but it would be much faster. Digital multiplications and divisions typically take several clock cycles, so you could save those for the really critical tasks like keeping the OS stable, and use analog calculations to do the flying bullets and baddies in a video game or whatever that isn't gonna break the system if it is off by a bit or so.
  
  
  Zippy continues:
  
  Quote:
  DOH got the timings a bit off, 5-5-5-12 or 4-4-4-15,anyway I can get 4GB of the slower or 2GB of the faster for about 120-130.
  
  From my past experience with ramm more is better than timing when they are that close.
  
  So I ave a question for you, I've been on a 939 3700+ for the past 2 years built a P4 dual core 3.0 mmm 945 is the model I think ran about 30% faster,I built it with 2GB 800Mhz ramm on a asrock 4core sata 2for a friend for Xmas, what kind of performance jump should I see, another 30% over the P4?
  
  sigh I know what the main bottle neck for it,I got 2 of thos asrock boards...its a good starting board at least but the 677mhz mem cap sucks.It's really impossible to say whether it would be 30% faster without knowing what yours and your friends applications typically are. Even then, it would be better just to test it than to speculate.
  
  As for your speed versus size issue, that is another area where you really need to determine what is more important to you to make a valid decision.
  
  Also, if you can put the 4 gigs in a dual channel configuration, you might get better performance (depending on the application) than if you had 2 gigs with lower latency but they were only configured on one channel.
  
  god I'm rambling my ass off now hahaharambling is good :P
  
  I ran the P4 945 for a month before taking ti to my friend I noticed 30% (give or take 10%) on response,loading/sorting data and other odds and ends its not a "drastic" change,hell I am running a XP 3000 with 1GB 400Mhz ramm at 166 across the board (dont ask reboots at 200mhz FBS but its working thats the goal of a backup PC),its not that different than the 3700 at time I benchmarked it it got 2000K less on 3Dmark03.
  
  Bascily I am waiting for that huge jump in speed it never seems to come :P
  
  
  I guess I will go with the 2GB and get another 2GB stick later,no use to try and save 50$ not with the 400$ 8800GTS I have to put in it in it LOL

  3.12.2007 05:24 #33

• maitland

  @Zippy:
  
  hehe, your wait is almost over. I go to school for Computer Engineering, and all I do is try to think of radical ideas. I try to use my right brain and my left brain in tandem, which is a rare trait among my classmates, I've noticed.
  
  So, what I'm saying is, I'll make your computer faster, Zippy! I swear to you! I SWEAR TO FREAKING GOD I WILL!! Zippy your computer will go so fast that it will finish the calculation before it even starts the calculation! That's how fast it will go zippy!!! THAT'S HOW FREAKING FAST IT WILL GO, ZIPPY!!!

  3.12.2007 05:37 #34

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by maitland: @Zippy:
  
  hehe, your wait is almost over. I go to school for Computer Engineering, and all I do is try to think of radical ideas. I try to use my right brain and my left brain in tandem, which is a rare trait among my classmates, I've noticed.
  
  So, what I'm saying is, I'll make your computer faster, Zippy! I swear to you! I SWEAR TO FREAKING GOD I WILL!! Zippy your computer will go so fast that it will finish the calculation before it even starts the calculation! That's how fast it will go zippy!!! THAT'S HOW FREAKING FAST IT WILL GO, ZIPPY!!!but...thats how zippy dose...only all the data gets lost because it moves to fast 0-o
  
  ....scary....!
  
  LOL
  
  But really when will ADM and intel get off the current limited multi core kick...

  3.12.2007 05:43 #35

• varnull

  @ Zippy
  
  You don't see a great speed increase because of the way 99% of current software is written..
  On xp that amounts to a 30% hit running on 64 bit hardware.. and dual core 64? do you add the 30%'s together?? who knows.. checking an amd dual core 3800+ whatever it is doesn't seem radically faster than a single p4 2.4..
  
  The trick is running truly parallel optimized and timed applications.
  
  On a 25 p2 cluster I can transcode a full dvd (dvd:author) in less than 15 minutes, where the amd monster takes an hour plus.. the speed is in optimized parallel software, but that changes for every system.. it's because of timings.
  
  At the moment the parallel supercomputer is in the domain of the immensely rich, big business, university computer departments, experimenters and redneck junk hoarders like me.. unfortunately due to the general numty level of the average computer user (I blame Bill) this situation isn't likely to change... and who the hell needs a 20 gigaflop machine for staring at idiots on youtube anyway??

  3.12.2007 05:44 #36

• maitland

  A few years ago, one of my professors built a massively parallel SIMD device that was something like 40 processors running at a blistering 20 megahertz (!) and could outperform a P4 running at a Gigahertz or so on certain massively redundant tasks like image convolution and the like.
  
  But Zippy, I really hear your lament. The current trend is to build sideways (parallel, multi-core, whatever) because we have built up (clock speed, pipeline optimizations, smaller transistors etc..) as far as we can go. The problem is nobody is having any new ideas, and nobody really has for decades...
  
  It's sad really, our society has made people forget how to create new things, evidently.

  3.12.2007 05:57 #37

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by varnull: @ Zippy
  
  You don't see a great speed increase because of the way 99% of current software is written..
  On xp that amounts to a 30% hit running on 64 bit hardware.. and dual core 64? do you add the 30%'s together?? who knows.. checking an amd dual core 3800+ whatever it is doesn't seem radically faster than a single p4 2.4..
  
  The trick is running truly parallel optimized and timed applications.
  
  On a 25 p2 cluster I can transcode a full dvd (dvd:author) in less than 15 minutes, where the amd monster takes an hour plus.. the speed is in optimized parallel software, but that changes for every system.. it's because of timings.
  
  At the moment the parallel supercomputer is in the domain of the immensely rich, big business, university computer departments, experimenters and redneck junk hoarders like me.. unfortunately due to the general numty level of the average computer user (I blame Bill) this situation isn't likely to change... and who the hell needs a 20 gigaflop machine for staring at idiots on youtube anyway??So nothing will make XP and current apps run "faster",since hardware has hardware speed limits, hardware is changing from speed/power to more advanced at running more things at once better,but I donot see the current line of consumer CPUs changing "much" then again the OS's are stuck in the stone age in comaprision.
  
  I know the software is "meek" and hardware is not much better.
  
  I use the "30%" as a telling of the performance I see even a 4200X2 with 400Mhz 3GB CL 3 ramm is not much different than a P4 2 core with 2GB of DDR 667 there is alil diff in them and a 3700 at 2.7Ghz with 2GB cas 2 DDR1 400MZ ramm, all this dcking with sht I have found there lil reason to waste the extra 80 on premium sht 0-o
  
  Bascily I have found there are 2 things you do not want cheap, CPUs and PSUs and maybe CPU heatsink units everything else you can get on the cheap and get buy at reasonable performance for half the cost.
  
  Even vidcards,better to wait a year and get a 200$ card at 100 than to get a 200$ card at 200 0-o
  unless you got the cash for powa!
  
  
  

  For all the console/game fanboys out their.
  http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles...Console-Rundown
  Oh god I can't stop laughing!!!

  3.12.2007 06:02 #38

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by maitland: A few years ago, one of my professors built a massively parallel SIMD device that was something like 40 processors running at a blistering 20 megahertz (!) and could outperform a P4 running at a Gigahertz or so on certain massively redundant tasks like image convolution and the like.
  
  But Zippy, I really hear your lament. The current trend is to build sideways (parallel, multi-core, whatever) because we have built up (clock speed, pipeline optimizations, smaller transistors etc..) as far as we can go. The problem is nobody is having any new ideas, and nobody really has for decades...
  
  It's sad really, our society has made people forget how to create new things, evidently.
  its the requiem for a consumer nation, we want things cheaper,smaller and quicker, "better" is a option, and with the goverment stifling industry and creating monopolies and conglomerates suing each other over stupid things nothign will change until it all breaks.
  
  I can see them repacking CPU tech for the next decade untill the industry is ready for some real change, it will be funny if lunix gains ground on parallel and floors windows int the coming years in performance.
  
  Would really like to see linux/unix gain some ground and become better OS's.
  

  For all the console/game fanboys out their.
  http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles...Console-Rundown
  Oh god I can't stop laughing!!!

  3.12.2007 06:09 #39

• varnull

  hehehe.. for a dare I put damnsmall on a quad core thing..
  
  4 penguins on the boot screen, and so fast you were hard pressed to use the thing. A 50mb os running completely in ram is a wonderful thing.
  
  For multicore machines linux and unix are leaps and bounds ahead of windows.. servers and the like have been running multi cpu architecture for years.
  
  As for the point of this topic.. hacking with a ps3..
  
  Not much point.. there are far better machines without the crazy instruction set and unique architecture. It's a games console with multimedia capabilities.. get real.. there is far more to using that cpu fully in a normal os environment than installing linux... so unless sony release full hardware specs and the full assembler instruction set then...... Wait and see.. I think a good quad core/quad cpu machine with a heap of ram will beat it hands down every time (oh and yellow dog linux is from back in 1999.. it can be upgraded, but sony don't really want people doing anything amazing with it.. just sidetrack all the console hackers a little why not ;-)

  3.12.2007 06:51 #40

• madman91

  This is cracking.. not hacking.
  
  Learn your terminology before spreading false truths.

  3.12.2007 21:41 #41

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by madman91: This is cracking.. not hacking.
  
  Learn your terminology before spreading false truths.cracking a pass into a site/aera of the net is hacking tho and thats the point I believe.

  3.12.2007 21:48 #42

• agwild99

  Quote:Originally posted by rainofire:
  and security is always getting better so it think its to hard for simple ppl to break i think that a "real" hacker must hav this $10 000 computer wich is proably faster than a ps3.
  cuz he has already made a lot of money. hey why r we talking about a he it could be a she? why can´t we picture a hacker as woman as a fisrt ttought funny eh..Follow the white rabbit Neo!

  5.12.2007 12:47 #43

• lubricant

  wasnt there some sort of news report that cell processors shouldnt be allowed in some countries cause they could be used to pilot missiles or some such jazz? or was that the ps2?
  

  -=HEY=-

  6.12.2007 21:02 #44

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by lubricant: wasnt there some sort of news report that cell processors shouldnt be allowed in some countries cause they could be used to pilot missiles or some such jazz? or was that the ps2?PS2, like they need them when they can just buddy up to our for sale officails....
  

  For all the console/game fanboys out their.
  http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles...Console-Rundown
  Oh god I can't stop laughing!!!

  6.12.2007 21:05 #45

• maitland

  Originally posted by lubricant: wasnt there some sort of news report that cell processors shouldnt be allowed in some countries cause they could be used to pilot missiles or some such jazz? or was that the ps2?Haha, prolly should have been the US, then. Were the ones doing the most firing these days. I'm more afraid of my own government's executive branch than I am of any terrorist. By a long shot.

  6.12.2007 21:06 #46

• borhan9

  Quote:To conclude his findings, Breese hopes that the report will encourage software-makers to increase their password security. "That's the reason I'm doing this," he says.I would have to agree with this comment.

  20.12.2007 19:06 #47

• CKhaleel

  must...hack...into U.S. goverment...jk

  20.12.2007 20:02 #48