Jump to content

AppleDecrypt Sinetek AnV (V3.0.0) for SL, Lion, Mountain Lion and Mavericks

AppleDecrypt dsmos Apple Protected Binaries SL Lion Mountain Lion

  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#41
beta992

beta992

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 338 posts
  • Gender:Male

Why those little Apple engineers...

Apparently they don't like my kexts lol.

They still work at the moment but in the future it might be needed to change the name of the driver...

WTF :D

 

So they took all the names of the kexts from osx86 websites and made a blacklist kexts? (I hope the kexts can be blocked with a bootloader or maybe FakeSMC)..



#42
Andy Vandijck

Andy Vandijck

    InsanelyMac Deity

  • Coders
  • 1,619 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tienen
  • Interests:Programming stuff for Mac OS X...
    Hacking...
    Hard rock (also really big Metallica...

WTF :D

So they took all the names of the kexts from osx86 websites and made a blacklist kexts? (I hope the kexts can be blocked with a bootloader or maybe FakeSMC)..

Yeah. In DP1 and DP2 it doesn't work yet but with a future DP or GM it will.
Currently the kext can also be deleted but that's also gonna change I bet

#43
shiecldk

shiecldk

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Taiwan

{censored}...

I found one of my account's name, which is my current apple-id, in the list...

 

What the hell are they thinking. That's really childish...

 

And one of the most ridiculous one is com.CalDigit.driver.CalDigitUSBxHCI. Don't they even consider what if it's installed by users who purchase CalDigit's USB3 card?



#44
Andy Vandijck

Andy Vandijck

    InsanelyMac Deity

  • Coders
  • 1,619 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tienen
  • Interests:Programming stuff for Mac OS X...
    Hacking...
    Hard rock (also really big Metallica...

{censored}...

I found one of my account's name, which is my current apple-id, in the list...

 

What the hell are they thinking. That's really childish...

 

And one of the most ridiculous one is com.CalDigit.driver.CalDigitUSBxHCI. Don't they even consider what if it's installed by users who purchase CalDigit's USB3 card?

Yeah... Huawei (USB 3G sticks) drivers are also blacklisted, etc...

When this goes into effect, a lot of mac users will be pissed...

Hell, what we know, we can bypass ;)



#45
shiecldk

shiecldk

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Taiwan

Yeah... Huawei (USB 3G sticks) drivers are also blacklisted, etc...

When this goes into effect, a lot of mac users will be pissed...

Hell, what we know, we can bypass ;)

I believe they'd lost more fans if they do so... (or not? )

Apple is not that attractive to me since they've released a fu*ing unstable iOS6 for my iPhone4.

They should spend more time improving the stability, not on this stupid one.

 

I was thinking about if I should buy MacBook Pro after I go to college. Now, I'd probably choose hackintosh laptop to support osx86 project.  :D



#46
AkimoA

AkimoA

    AMD

  • Local Moderators
  • 213 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Black Forest (GER)

U ar  a famous bloody Rockstar ;) hehe



#47
indiandragon

indiandragon

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 68 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India
  • Interests:Developer, Hacker, Researcher

I feel it's the other way around. I think the kexts mentioned in the exclude list can be loaded without signing , which is required for other kexts which are not mentioned in the exclude list. i.e In other words Apple might be kind of helping our kexts bypass maverik's kext security in place.



#48
Andy Vandijck

Andy Vandijck

    InsanelyMac Deity

  • Coders
  • 1,619 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tienen
  • Interests:Programming stuff for Mac OS X...
    Hacking...
    Hard rock (also really big Metallica...

I feel it's the other way around. I think the kexts mentioned in the exclude list can be loaded without signing , which is required for other kexts which are not mentioned in the exclude list. i.e In other words Apple might be kind of helping our kexts bypass maverik's kext security in place.

That would be really cool.
That explains why it doesn't complain about those kexts when you install them.

#49
indiandragon

indiandragon

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 68 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India
  • Interests:Developer, Hacker, Researcher

That would be really cool.
That explains why it doesn't complain about those kexts when you install them.

Yeah Andy. If that's the case , be ready to receive a pay check from Apple !  You deserve it :)



#50
Andy Vandijck

Andy Vandijck

    InsanelyMac Deity

  • Coders
  • 1,619 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tienen
  • Interests:Programming stuff for Mac OS X...
    Hacking...
    Hard rock (also really big Metallica...

Yeah Andy. If that's the case , be ready to receive a pay check from Apple ! You deserve it :)

Send them a mail: hey! You forgot some of my drivers. Lol

#51
xmen107

xmen107

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 111 posts
I tried to remove the fakesmc to test the system boots ... but it takes a long time because ... :: ACPI_SMC_PlatformPlugin registerLPCDriver - failed to locate SMC driver, so i have to continue to use the fakesmc lol

#52
djdjukic

djdjukic

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Gender:Male

I've compiled this for Snow Leopard (32 and 64-bit) with Xcode 3.2.6.

It seems to build just fine with no changes at all. I found this quite useful for an AMD rig. It eliminates a bunch of "decryption failed" boot messages and seems to speed up the boot process.

Attached File  AppleDecrypt-Sinetek-AnV.10.6.kext.zip   29.3KB   26 downloads



#53
tonydickinson

tonydickinson

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Donators
  • 189 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore

Hey Guys - I have just come across this thread, I really had no idea what Apple were doing - @ Schiedk MacBookPro, yeh you have been a solid supporter of OSX 86 for a long time but they look so cool and hold their value, and really no others (laptops) even begin to compare and you can still contribute....



#54
Slice

Slice

    InsanelyMacaholic

  • Local Moderators
  • 2,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Moscow

Version of 2008 if someone interested

Attached File  AppleDecrypt.kext.Leo.zip   11.36KB   9 downloads



#55
Slice

Slice

    InsanelyMacaholic

  • Local Moderators
  • 2,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Moscow

@AnV

I notice significant change in the new sources.
Old call is aes_decrypt_cbc  from kernel. 
New call is  DSMOS_BF_cbc_encrypt from BLOWFISH DECRYPT from OpenSSL.
Are you sure it is the same and more portable? 
Understand.

encrypt<->decrypt?

I'll recommend to exclude IOLog from page_transform and from compare_setup.

I also think there is not needed check for PPC. There are no PPC Hackintosh.  :wink_anim:

 

I am interesting to use AppleDecrypt together with FakeSMC. Results will be after long testing.



#56
WinstonAce

WinstonAce

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 248 posts
Is this kext a replacement to fakesmc?

#57
Slice

Slice

    InsanelyMacaholic

  • Local Moderators
  • 2,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Moscow

Is this kext a replacement to fakesmc?

Yes and No.

This kext permits you to boot OSX without FakeSMC but you loose some functionality due to absent of other SMC keys.



#58
eep357

eep357

    Triple Platinum

  • Supervisors
  • 2,527 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dark Side of The Wall
  • Interests:things and stuff

That would be really cool.
That explains why it doesn't complain about those kexts when you install them.

Just came across this, looks to have a very short "exclude" list and then very long list of kexts that are OK to load without a valid signature. The allowed list has some kext that come from the Install OSX app, 3rd party and every Hackintosh kext I know of, even see my own name in this list too! My guess would be Apple just added dump of every kext they have could find any reference to without reviewing their function, then from here on they can just remove ones from the list that are a problem, causing much less work down the road and less upset average users. Also if there is a size check on file, adding new entries to it would cause much more work than simply removing existing entries.



#59
Andy Vandijck

Andy Vandijck

    InsanelyMac Deity

  • Coders
  • 1,619 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tienen
  • Interests:Programming stuff for Mac OS X...
    Hacking...
    Hard rock (also really big Metallica...

Just came across this, looks to have a very short "exclude" list and then very long list of kexts that are OK to load without a valid signature. The allowed list has some kext that come from the Install OSX app, 3rd party and every Hackintosh kext I know of, even see my own name in this list too! My guess would be Apple just added dump of every kext they have could find any reference to without reviewing their function, then from here on they can just remove ones from the list that are a problem, causing much less work down the road and less upset average users. Also if there is a size check on file, adding new entries to it would cause much more work than simply removing existing entries.

If signed drivers would mean this list doesn't matter, the second Apple blocks kexts with no valid signature like FakeSMC, we could rebuild them and sign them with an Apple developer certificate (like I have, as I'm a paying dev).
Only a theory though...
I think kexts with no valid dev certificate only are passed through this list.
We need further testing on this.

#60
Andy Vandijck

Andy Vandijck

    InsanelyMac Deity

  • Coders
  • 1,619 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tienen
  • Interests:Programming stuff for Mac OS X...
    Hacking...
    Hard rock (also really big Metallica...

Just came across this, looks to have a very short "exclude" list and then very long list of kexts that are OK to load without a valid signature. The allowed list has some kext that come from the Install OSX app, 3rd party and every Hackintosh kext I know of, even see my own name in this list too! My guess would be Apple just added dump of every kext they have could find any reference to without reviewing their function, then from here on they can just remove ones from the list that are a problem, causing much less work down the road and less upset average users. Also if there is a size check on file, adding new entries to it would cause much more work than simply removing existing entries.

If signed drivers would mean this list doesn't matter, the second Apple blocks kexts with no valid signature like FakeSMC, we could rebuild them and sign them with an Apple developer certificate (like I have, as I'm a paying dev).
Only a theory though...
I think kexts with no valid dev certificate only are passed through this list.
We need further testing on this.

EDIT: Oh yeah? size check.... probably checksum that verifies the file wasn't modified, which is probably far worse than a size check if it's a custom checksum...

@AnV
I notice significant change in the new sources.
Old call is aes_decrypt_cbc from kernel.
New call is DSMOS_BF_cbc_encrypt from BLOWFISH DECRYPT from OpenSSL.
Are you sure it is the same and more portable?
Understand.
encrypt<->decrypt?
I'll recommend to exclude IOLog from page_transform and from compare_setup.
I also think there is not needed check for PPC. There are no PPC Hackintosh. :wink_anim:

I am interesting to use AppleDecrypt together with FakeSMC. Results will be after long testing.

Yes, the encrypt parameter has a value indicating encryption and decryption.
Apple silently switched from a double AES decryption to a single Blowfish decryption (with OSK0 and OSK1 concatenated to a single key) but still disguising it as AES in the Dont steal Mac OS X.kext binary.
It's true the PPC code can be excluded as there never was any encryption on PPC mac anyway and these days there also is no more PPC macs with 10.6 or better as it is all Intel.
The decryption handler in action was used in verbose mode to check it handled the decryption.
True this was only used for debugging check and can be excluded too :D







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: AppleDecrypt, dsmos, Apple Protected Binaries, SL, Lion, Mountain Lion


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

© 2014 InsanelyMac  |   News  |   Forum  |   Downloads  |   OSx86 Wiki  |   Mac Netbook  |   PHP hosting by CatN  |   Designed by Ed Gain  |   Logo by irfan  |   Privacy Policy