RE: Re: A89: Archive Utility v2.00


[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

RE: Re: A89: Archive Utility v2.00




I know, perhaps someone could write a module into the TI OS that is
essentially a virus scan?  I wouldn't think it would be terribly hard,
just make it so if something tries to write on the certain areas of
concern, you would have to okay it.  

Mark E. Scott Jr.
mscott@dbcity.net


-----Original Message-----
From: Dux Gregis [mailto:dux@acz.org]
Sent: Sunday, June 06, 1999 12:57 AM
To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: Re: A89: Archive Utility v2.00



That's not what I know.  Apparently once the flash ROM protection is
disabled and the user has control, all memory (including the upgrade
link area, being the same ROM as the rest of flash mem) is subject to
editing.  And yes, any program (including a normal asm program) can
damage your calculator beyond repair.  But don't panic -- ah, what the
hell, why not panic?

A simple solution: only run programs that have been priorly tested (I
believe vti emulates the bug), say programs from ticalc.org.  And if
you know the address used in the hack, don't flaunt it recklessly.


>
> Olle, we need that stuff by your friend again. . .
>
> The way that the Flash ROM is constructed, it's impossible to
completely
> screw up the calculator.  The Flash ROM can ONLY be written to by
either A)
> someplace else in the Flash ROM, B) the Flash ROM upgrade routines,
and C)
> that bug Dux mentioned (I'd like to know more about it).  It
*cannot*
> normally be overwritten by programs in the RAM or User Data Archive.
And
> even though the bug allows them to get around that, the Flash ROM
update
> routines are true ROM, which cannot be overwritten (period) -
meaning that
> should your Flash ROM be corrupted, you can always link up to a
computer and
> send the ROM again.
>
> > This also adds the possibility f Virus's. Yu know as soon
omeonestupid
> > omes along and see's this they e going to try to ake a virus to
kill
> > youralc for good.  If the Rom's corruptd then takng outthe
batteres
> > wouldn't even stop it. Does the ROM have to have built in ways of
> > recieving new product code?  If so we ned a way of protecting our
> > individual ROM.  Any ideas or suggestions?  I not trying to star a
> > panick and if I'm wrong please corret me.
> >
> > c2b3
>
>
>
>
>