Intel based machine hackability?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Thought someone here might have some info on this. There are people I know saying its going to be trivial taking the Mac OS and recompiling to run on any Intel box. They say it wont take much work and whatever Apple does to prevent this will be easily hackable. Any comments on this?





-----------------------

"I did a little research on this. You'll be looking at a standard Pentium4 proc on a motherboard with TPM -- a hardware cryptography module containing a 2kbyte RSA public&private keypair (hardcoded into the module) and some software API to handle digital signatures & crypto via the TPM.



RSA is a standard key algorithm that's used in software all over the place: SSL certificates, OpenSSH keys, and some PGP keys. It can be implemented in software using the readily available OpenSSL package, just as the TPM would implement it.



My guess is that one of two things will happen: either



1) MacOS will just check for the TPM hardware, which would be too easy to override (though that's what previous versions have done up to this point) or



2) MacOS will use the keys to sign some piece of code or some files, requiring their decryption or signature validation in order to run.



the 2nd scenario would me much more difficult (but not improbable) to crack, requiring replacement of the TPM driver with hooks that emulate the TPM in software, via a self-generated pair of RSA keys from OpenSSL or some other software implementation."

----------------------------------

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    Basically, whatever DRM Apple uses will be circumvented within days of OS X / Intel's release.
  • Reply 2 of 8
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Apple will not be able to prevent hack, but Apple will not support PC. One of the key to understand the stability of mac os X, is the little number of configurations supported, at the difference of Windows.

    If someone hack mac os X, there is a lot of chances that he will encounter compatibility problems. Therefore only geeks will hack mac os X, and the average consumer joe will not be tempted.
  • Reply 3 of 8
    Quote:

    Originally posted by musical73

    Thought someone here might have some info on this. There are people I know saying its going to be trivial taking the Mac OS and recompiling to run on any Intel box. They say it wont take much work and whatever Apple does to prevent this will be easily hackable. Any comments on this?



    First, they would need the source code. Hacking into 1 Infinite Loop and finding every bits and pieces of code you need is a bit harder to do.
  • Reply 4 of 8
    pbg4 dudepbg4 dude Posts: 1,611member
    The core of OS X, Darwin, is freely downloadable in source code form at opensource.apple.com . It might not give you what you need straightaway but it'll probably provide enough information to get people seriously interested in hacking OS X a good start.
  • Reply 5 of 8
    Not to mention that every time there is a security or other update, it's likely Apple will break all the hacks that were out there. So after you install the latest update on your hacked PC, it will stop functioning.



    That is how Apple has been handling it with iTunes and FairPlay.
  • Reply 6 of 8
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    Its a non-problem. Who cares if a bunch of haX0rs run OSX on their custom boxen? Its not a lost sale and can only increase OSX mindshare. It would only be a problem if somebody like Dell supplied it pre-loaded and that ain't never going to happen.
  • Reply 7 of 8
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    Notice that Real never restored Harmony support for the iPod. Point is, while the hackers will always want to run enable the latest Mac OS X release, you mainstream user is not going to want to keep up with the cat and mouse game. Isn't that essentially what PC users are doing now already, to keep spyware and viruses at bay?
  • Reply 8 of 8
    rhumgodrhumgod Posts: 1,289member
    More exposure is not a bad thing. Lost revenue is. I think that Apple may tie in hardware assurance so that a true OS X license recognizes a piece of hardware. Can it be circumvented, sure. But what is their loss. A couple of people interested in spending zero money for a truly nice computing experience. I think they already ignore those people in their marketing/pricing efforts and would not shed one tear to see a hacker get OS X running on a bastardized PC. It's not like that user is going to go out and buy Quicktime Pro/iLife/iWork/Apperature/Final Cut/Motion/you name it anyway.



    The time wasted is more than the $499 shell out for a dang Mini anyway. Oh, did you think the Mini was intended to be anything but an eye-opener for the Wintel crowd wanting to switch? It's not like they invested serious R&D on the Mini - they knew the switch was coming. Now, it just eases them into the intended market a lot more easily.
Sign In or Register to comment.