Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

OSx86 10.4.2 (Possibly) Leaked?


bofors

This thread indicates that OSx86 10.4.2 has been leaked and research into it's new TPM mechanism has begun:

 

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?sh...799entry18799

 

Please remember that as this site is under US jurisdiction that any potential circumvention of OSx86 10.4.2's new TPM mechanism can be not discussed here due to the DMCA. However, it may be discussed at the Win2OSX site instead:

 

http://www.win2osx.net/forum/showthread.ph...sted=1#post8751

 

Apparently, no OSx86 10.4.2 torrents have been seeded yet, however when that changes please respect this site's "no warez" policy.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0


User Feedback

Recommended Comments



Since we already have 10.4.1 to play with, I don't think it's a good idea to publicize any new hacks. Any such new hacks will only amount to free TPM vulnerabily analysis for Apple, and make the eventual TPM much more difficult if impossible to crack.

 

We need to have a long-term perspective on things.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting news. Thanks.

We'll be watching the unfolding of the news of this new release with great interest.

 

You know, the contradiction in our no-warez policy is that essentially most of the members of the board either used Deamoo's VMWare image or the leaked Dev DVD of x86 Tiger for their x86 OSX install. <_<

 

And I bet in a few weeks/months time these people shall be discussing issues in Tiger 10.4.2 which apperently they by some miraculous happening each of them all of a sutton possess... ;)

 

Oh well, I understand perfectly, without such measures we risk cease-and-desist orders from Apple lawyers, which off course we certainly don't want to provoke. And I hope that the Win2OSX site will be spared such an outcome too.

 

For now I'm anxious what improvements this new version shall contain x86-wise (compatebility, hardware-support, performance) and if again one all to familliar patch-mage will be able to make it possible to operate again too for the likes of pour SSE2-only cpu owners like me. Go, go, Maxxuss, go! :lol:

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

dd_apple,

 

you sound like you're planning a mugging. <_>

 

i don't mean to put you down or anything, i want 10.4.2 to play with too. but without the community involvement, chatting and sharing info, there is nothing left but boring piracy.

 

apple deserves access to the same info that the hackers have, to keep the game fair. it's also a shame the DMCA makes that more difficult.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
You know, the contradiction in our no-warez policy is that essentially most of the members of the board either used Deamoo's VMWare image or the leaked Dev DVD of x86 Tiger for their x86 OSX install.

 

<_ well that probably true but it not our legal concern how you got what have or done to totally ok talk about that. however talking get crack is steve doesn like... so where we draw the line. a news site hacking site. src="%7B___base_url___%7D/uploads/emoticons/default_laugh.png" alt=":lol:">

 

BTW - This thread title is a little misleading since we haven't confirmed that anything has leaked yet. When something does, I'll write up a full article.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is always a first person to get something. i think if he were lying, he'd be a lot more convincing. <_>

 

he isn't able to upload it until monday and is at this time trying to figure things out. in the meantime, why doesn't someone knowlegable go on over there and help him out? seems like the easiest way to find out one way or the other.

 

http://www.win2osx.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1296&page=3

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
Since we already have 10.4.1 to play with, I don't think it's a good idea to publicize any new hacks. Any such new hacks will only amount to free TPM vulnerabily analysis for Apple, and make the eventual TPM much more difficult if impossible to crack.

 

We need to have a long-term perspective on things.

 

I think these are important points to be considered. In terms of a long a term perspective, I want to see millions of people running OSx86 on non-Apple hardware and otherwise pressure Apple into at least a clone program if just selling OS X86 outright for PCs like Windows.

 

With respect to making the TPM increasing difficult to hack, from the reports that I have read it seems that the first released version, 10.4.1, was rather light and that Apple could have done more to secure OSx86. However, it is simply impossible for Apple to ultimately prevent people from running OSx86 on non-TPM'd hardware (future TPM'd PCs might be another story).

 

At best Apple can continue what appears to be it's current strategy which is deterrent. At every release, Apple tweaks the TPM mechanism so a new patch is required, but ultimately produced. So, it effectively becomes a cycle or technical stalemate that will, as a by-product, produce hundreds of compentent OSx86/TPM hackers. This is good because we want lots of people working on both of this issue, whether it be to produce OSx86 graphics board drivers or fighting against Hollywood's plan to take over our computers with TPM-like technology.

 

Next, we have to consider the viability of keeping things private. While this certainly must occur in the greater OSx86 community for security reasons, you are proposing taking it to another level. The first problem with this is that it is too easy for Apple to infiltrate any private group and they certainly have the resources to pay people to do it. Then of course this small private group would be a very simple target for Apple to deal with, as opposed to some amorphous community numbering over ten thousand. In short, there is safety in numbers.

 

Clearly, the distribution mechanisms, namely bittorrents, work better with large numbers of people. Then of course, there will always be politically and social issues. Some genius may prefer to work alone but needs 10.4.2 to do anything. As we have seen already, numerous people have produced patchs, and the community can judge for itself which is best. Likewise, these authors care discuss what they have individually learned.

 

To summize, secrecy and security certainly are very important considerations here, but these concerns ultimately succumb to need for and benefits from mass collaboration, like open-source software. Finally, even if we decided to take the route you are proposing it likely that others would go the public way rendering it pointless.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

tks guys 4 help.... as u said it hasn't been leaked yet... i'll share it tomorrow only after a check.... i found another person that has it.... if we have the same md5 i'll share that but if not maybe i'll have to invent something before share it.

i'll keep u updated

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
Indeed, it seems kind of fishy for this guy to say that yet it not be anywhere to be found.

 

I find k1n6w4r3z to be very credible and I think it is more important that the proper precautions be taken before seeding torrent, rather than exposing oneself to the potential wrath of Apple Legal by rushing to provide the goods claimed.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
Next, we have to consider the viability of keeping things private. While this certainly must occur in the greater OSx86 community for security reasons, you are proposing taking it to another level. The first problem with this is that it is too easy for Apple to infiltrate any private group and they certainly have the resources to pay people to do it. Then of course this small private group would be a very simple target for Apple to deal with, as opposed to some amorphous community numbering over ten thousand. In short, there is safety in numbers.

 

Clearly, the distribution mechanisms, namely bittorrents, work better with large numbers of people. Then of course, there will always be politically and social issues. Some genius may prefer to work alone but needs 10.4.2 to do anything. As we have seen already, numerous people have produced patchs, and the community can judge for itself which is best. Likewise, these authors care discuss what they have individually learned.

 

To summize, secrecy and security certainly are very important considerations here, but these concerns ultimately succumb to need for and benefits from mass collaboration, like open-source software. Finally, even if we decided to take the route you are proposing it likely that others would go the public way rendering it pointless.

 

This seems like an important point, and I agree with you completely Bofors. As many have suspected - and I'm sure has been the case - any Apple employee can simply join our site, and with a bit of searching, discover all the patches and other such things that have been devised by the community. This point exactly is why we may not have gotten some sort of letter from Apple Legal. The problem is, with such a large community, It would be increasingly hard for us to create a secure environment to "explore" the osx86 software in. Like Bofors pointed out, somone could decide to go public, or, we could simply just have another Deadmoo image with the new patches contained within. It begs the question, as to how we can go about making our community more secure.

 

tks guys 4 help.... as u said it hasn't been leaked yet... i'll share it tomorrow only after a check.... i found another person that has it.... if we have the same md5 i'll share that but if not maybe i'll have to invent something before share it.

i'll keep u updated

 

I heard rumours that each copy seeded to devlopers was unique in some way. I don't know how exactly, but these are simply rumours and speculation. Hopefully k1n6w4r3z can verify this with his other contact.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I adjusted the topic of this thread, just so that no one gets confused.

 

"r u serious that teh dVD has leaked? OMGROFL!!!!11!!111"

 

:huh:

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
I adjusted the topic of this thread, just so that no one gets confused.

 

"r u serious that teh dVD has leaked? OMGROFL!!!!11!!111"

 

:huh:

 

When I started this thread, I had thought that this was in the hands of more than one person here, thereby justifying the need for a special "patch development" thread on Win2OSX forum.

 

I was wrong, so it appears that this thread was a little pre-mature and I am sorry if I mislead anyone. Nonetheless, I would expect 10.4.2 to leaked for real in the next few days, if not tomorrow.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

bofors-

Hey, no problem, and I hope you don't mind that I changed it - I just wanted to clear things up, since a lot of people would be interested if that were the case.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
bofors-

Hey, no problem, and I hope you don't mind that I changed it - I just wanted to clear things up, since a lot of people would be interested if that were the case.

 

Then also shouldn't this be moved to some other part of the forums? Like thunderdome maybe .....

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so JaS, since it still falls under the category of Osx86 news. If anything, It should go to Patches and Fixes. But we'll just keep it here for now, since according to our friend k1n6w4r3z, the DVD will most likely be leaked within the coming days.

 

Remeber though, no direct links or warez!

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
Then also shouldn't this be moved to some other part of the forums? Like thunderdome maybe .....

 

While I really do not have any personal attachment to this thread, I would reccomend leaving it here until the 10.4.2 torrent is actually seeded. Then this thread should be locked and/or moved.

 

Until that time, it seems that we would need a "Where is 10.4.2?" discussion thread anyways, but I have no problem leaving this decision to the sound judgement of the OSx86Project administration.

 

Otherwise, I think that Mashugly has done the right thing and already taken care of the real issue here by simply renaming the misleading title of this thread.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently each DMG has a different MD5 sum. The one that the other guy has does NOT match the one I have. His is also slightly larger (though mine matches the exact size reported by devs)~

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if the md5's are diffrent,once you convert it to iso does it even matter what the the dmg's original md5 was?

theoreticly it could be leaked in iso format.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need further confirmation of this, to know for sure. If there is anyone, or anyone who knows someone with the 10.4.2 update, can you please veryify the md5 sums against DeathChills and k1n6w4r3z's?

 

Even if the md5's are diffrent once you convert it to iso does it even matter what the the dmg's original md5 was?

 

I was thinking something similar to that as well. If you change anything within the DMG, you change the md5 sum. So, theoretically, If you changed something within the DVD then it would be different from whatever Apple may have recorded (If they are indeed making each DMG unique). If you were to convert it to a DMG though, JaS, wouldn't converting it back simply reveal the original md5 sum?

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
We need further confirmation of this, to know for sure. If there is anyone, or anyone who knows someone with the 10.4.2 update, can you please veryify the md5 sums against DeathChills and k1n6w4r3z's?

I was thinking something similar to that as well. If you change anything within the DMG, you change the md5 sum. So, theoretically, If you changed something within the DVD then it would be different from whatever Apple may have recorded (If they are indeed making each DMG unique). If you were to convert it to a DMG though, JaS, wouldn't converting it back simply reveal the original md5 sum?

 

I had thought of this too about converting it back.But im not sure what happens.I will test it out by converting the original dev dmg to iso and back again,And see what I come up with.I will post back tonight about my findings.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
We need further confirmation of this, to know for sure. If there is anyone, or anyone who knows someone with the 10.4.2 update, can you please veryify the md5 sums against DeathChills and k1n6w4r3z's?

I was thinking something similar to that as well. If you change anything within the DMG, you change the md5 sum. So, theoretically, If you changed something within the DVD then it would be different from whatever Apple may have recorded (If they are indeed making each DMG unique). If you were to convert it to a DMG though, JaS, wouldn't converting it back simply reveal the original md5 sum?

 

Maybe I'm being stupid here, but what if apple doesn't track the MD5 itself, but rather some unique file within each 10.4.2 image? you could convert the image and mess with the MD5 all you want, but the unique file would still identify you. Or is that unlikely?

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
Maybe I'm being stupid here, but what if apple doesn't track the MD5 itself, but rather some unique file within each 10.4.2 image? you could convert the image and mess with the MD5 all you want, but the unique file would still identify you. Or is that unlikely?

 

That could be true ... but I have to take it one step at a time ;)

Maybe theres no magic at all.The dmg might get a different md5 from the download proccess,as a side effect and they have no meaning at all.We could be getting hung up on nothing with the md5'5.To be honest I doubt apple would digitaly sig each dev download .. .there would have been thousands of them.I just dont see it.But I will work thru the theory.Better safe then sorry

 

Edit : Its 10:22 pm here now and I will finish getting the original dev DMG at 1 am.Then I will get the md5 from it.I have the original dev dvd but it's in iso format.Trying to re-dmg it was no good,it was almost 4 gigs so I know that wouldnt have been a true test.I have to take the original unconverted DMG and get the md5 for it.Then convert it to iso and then back to DMG again and re-md5 it.If that conversion puts the DMG at higher then 2.44 GiB (2618677269 Bytes).then I guess it proves that you couldn't just convert the iso back to DMG to get the original md5.

Wow that almost sounds like double talk ;) I need a coffee be back soon

 

Oh and Hello colby,Welcome to the forums :)

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am having some relevant files from 10.4.2 right now. I would like to make sure that they are not contain any hidden ID.

 

Edit: Removed content violating DMCA

Edited by Metrogirl

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites


×