Comment by rcarmo

6 hours ago

As I was reading this, I realized that the ESP32 HomeKit debugging session I had running was taking a while, and this happened:

Me: what are you doing?

Agent: I’m resolving Apple’s private video-resolution lookup table to determine whether iOS 26 supports 320×240 for HomeKit live streaming.

The decompiled source hides the numeric constants, so I:

- Downloaded/extracted the iOS 26.1 arm64e dyld cache to /workspace/tmp/ios26-dyld/.

- Built and installed the read-only apfs-fuse utility needed to mount Apple’s APFS image.

- Planned to extract HomeKitDaemon and decode its resolution table.

Me: Oh, OK. Carry on then

These are weird times.

It's insane, right? Reverse engineering is so much fun, I find myself doing it on random apps so often now

  • 0x Alpha is unlimited free tokens this weekend so I had it take apart the original 8088 PC Elite and reverse it back to original MASM assembler and come up with plausible names for all the functions and data structures and check that it compiles back to byte-perfect original.

    Wild!

  • it's especially fun when you do it yourself, I advise toying around with https://crackmes.one. with time and practice, everything becomes open-source because you can read assembly XD

    • Not legally, which is the issue. I can "open source" Windows 11 and rip out some of the shittiness, but Microsoft is gonna take issue. If it were MIT licensed that would be a different story, but there isn't enough money for lawyers in the world where it's not.

      4 replies →

  • We're entering an age where doing binary modification on live binaries is not a huge deal. Everything is now open "source"?

    • What is it called when there's a process that's available to individuals but is long and onerous and cannot be shared among them? Saying the binaries are open source now means that the work of reverse engineering will be repeated exactly in proportion to the number of times it's modified. I would argue on a large scale this is still effectively closed source.

      5 replies →

    • I would move the quotes to "open" since the issue of licensing is still left. Although LLM providers have shown that they don't care about copyright so it should go both ways.

      1 reply →