How the Nintendo Switch prevents downgrades by irreparably blowing its own fuses(blog.jonlu.ca)
blog.jonlu.ca
How the Nintendo Switch prevents downgrades by irreparably blowing its own fuses
https://blog.jonlu.ca/posts/nintendo-switch?ref=hn
108 comments
I'm curious, how do Nintendo justify such an anti-consumer protection? It seems like it only really has upside for them.
Why is the upside only to Nintendo? If Nintendo can maintain a proper "hack free" device more third parties will be willing to release their games on the Switch - as a consumer my upside is that I get the games.
Huh, that's a really nice way of looking at it. I suppose I was thinking that it's my device that I've paid for so there shouldn't have unnecessary restrictions imposed on it. But it's true that I'd prefer a restricted device with a greater game library over an unrestricted device with no games!
> If Nintendo can maintain a proper "hack free" device more third parties will be willing to release their games on the Switch
I don't think it's quite as cut-and-dry as this.
- The draw of a "hack free" platform varies by genre. For competitive multiplayer games, it's a big draw. For single-player and creative games, you might find a larger market in less restrictive, more moddable, platforms (eg, if you were making a Minecraft clone, would you target Switch or PC?).
- If the platform is popular enough, the level of lockdown may not affect the calculus that much.
- And, of course, it depends on how successful these measures are at preventing hacks. There's a big difference in draw between 50%, 90%, and 100% hack prevention, because of how the knowledge of cheaters affects player perception. Eg, in a competitive game, knowing cheats exist can taint the experience of being outplayed, as you wonder whether your opponent was cheating.
Overall, I'm not saying that GP's viewpoint is an invalid one, just that the tradeoffs are a little more nuanced than "more lockdown more games".
I don't think it's quite as cut-and-dry as this.
- The draw of a "hack free" platform varies by genre. For competitive multiplayer games, it's a big draw. For single-player and creative games, you might find a larger market in less restrictive, more moddable, platforms (eg, if you were making a Minecraft clone, would you target Switch or PC?).
- If the platform is popular enough, the level of lockdown may not affect the calculus that much.
- And, of course, it depends on how successful these measures are at preventing hacks. There's a big difference in draw between 50%, 90%, and 100% hack prevention, because of how the knowledge of cheaters affects player perception. Eg, in a competitive game, knowing cheats exist can taint the experience of being outplayed, as you wonder whether your opponent was cheating.
Overall, I'm not saying that GP's viewpoint is an invalid one, just that the tradeoffs are a little more nuanced than "more lockdown more games".
> if you were making a Minecraft clone, would you target Switch or PC?
This depends a lot on your monetization strategy. If your plan is a free or low-cost game with skins for sale, having a wild west story for modding may not be at all what you want.
This depends a lot on your monetization strategy. If your plan is a free or low-cost game with skins for sale, having a wild west story for modding may not be at all what you want.
Ahh, the drug dealer model.
Well yes. Not at all condoning it, but I mean, this is how Fortnite and friends work.
> it's my device that I've paid for so there shouldn't have unnecessary restrictions imposed on it
Another way of looking at it is that it’s a platform to which they have licensed you access ... of course under those terms it should be lease rather than outright purchase (eg like a proprietary set top box) but I guess the market hasn’t quite wised up to that yet ...
Another way of looking at it is that it’s a platform to which they have licensed you access ... of course under those terms it should be lease rather than outright purchase (eg like a proprietary set top box) but I guess the market hasn’t quite wised up to that yet ...
It really depends on how much those protections restrict you.
Does buying music online come with unlimited redownloads yet? Or do you still have to make a backup yourself, which is tied to a device and you'll lose anyway?
Does buying music online come with unlimited redownloads yet? Or do you still have to make a backup yourself, which is tied to a device and you'll lose anyway?
That analogy doesn't make much sense. It's more comparable to the iPod than to iTunes.
Which holds true until they abandon the platform. Then the homebrew community would take over, if they had access.
> it's my device that I've paid for so there shouldn't have unnecessary restrictions imposed on it
In the grand scheme of things, this is a very niche opinion.
How specifically would your use of the Switch change if Nintendo didn’t prevent downgrades in this way?
In the grand scheme of things, this is a very niche opinion.
How specifically would your use of the Switch change if Nintendo didn’t prevent downgrades in this way?
>In the grand scheme of things, this is a very niche opinion.
Uh, how ya figure?
Oh, do you mean in the, "Well, no consumer would ever actively think of that sense!" Because that's downright wrong, and it has been a longtime complaint of mine since childhood, which my family will be happy to attest to the degree of ear bending that results from these types of shenanigans every single time I discover them. Further, if you think that idea is niche, I'd like to point you toward the right-to-repair movement,as well as the bloody Android ecosystem as well.
The only people to whom what you refer to as a "niche" idea, are a niche into an nd of themselves; namely production companies that wish to infringe on the right of First Sale.
Get with the 21st Century. People are not satisfied with planned obsolescence, and while they'll consume things made in a user hostile way, I'll assure you, once an actor that commits to consumer friendly electronics fabrication gets traction in the space, and shows signs of the ability to collect good talent, people will flock to them.
Don't get me wrong. I like Nintendo, I just hate predatory hardware forging practices.
Uh, how ya figure?
Oh, do you mean in the, "Well, no consumer would ever actively think of that sense!" Because that's downright wrong, and it has been a longtime complaint of mine since childhood, which my family will be happy to attest to the degree of ear bending that results from these types of shenanigans every single time I discover them. Further, if you think that idea is niche, I'd like to point you toward the right-to-repair movement,as well as the bloody Android ecosystem as well.
The only people to whom what you refer to as a "niche" idea, are a niche into an nd of themselves; namely production companies that wish to infringe on the right of First Sale.
Get with the 21st Century. People are not satisfied with planned obsolescence, and while they'll consume things made in a user hostile way, I'll assure you, once an actor that commits to consumer friendly electronics fabrication gets traction in the space, and shows signs of the ability to collect good talent, people will flock to them.
Don't get me wrong. I like Nintendo, I just hate predatory hardware forging practices.
> Uh, how ya figure?
Because most people don't let this affect purchasing decisions when it's a product they really want.
Right-to-repair advocates are not the norm.
People buy iPads, iPhones, Pexels, Switches, whatever because they want them. If the product is desirable enough people will overlook planned obsolescence and a whole lot more, too.
Android is popular because it is inexpensive not because it's more open.
You really think a "consumer-friendly" electronics company will unseat Nintendo, Apple, etc.?
Because most people don't let this affect purchasing decisions when it's a product they really want.
Right-to-repair advocates are not the norm.
People buy iPads, iPhones, Pexels, Switches, whatever because they want them. If the product is desirable enough people will overlook planned obsolescence and a whole lot more, too.
Android is popular because it is inexpensive not because it's more open.
You really think a "consumer-friendly" electronics company will unseat Nintendo, Apple, etc.?
When one comes into existence? You bet. Manufacturing capabilities are much closer to the home than they've ever been before. You had the big actors at the forefront dominating the market for so long because you needed to be cutting edge to survive. Now? Hell, a god blessed RaspberryPi represents near State-of-the-Art performance for a large portion of my childhood needs. In terms of possibilities that can be realized on the cheap, we're at an inflection point where the bigger, faster processor in 6 months costs more than 6 months of figuring out how to use what you've got.
Knowing how to use something is becoming more productive than externalizing that knowledge and letting someone else distill it for you. I see a future driving in the direction of retraction and a pruning of inefficiency to back off of just shoveling more and more into wasteful wank, and getting back to building what you need and taking it from there.
Then again, most of my social circles have been make-do types, so maybe I am in a bubble. I certainly know the more cosmopolitanly inclined infrequently think about things like repurposing or fixing things. I'm praying that'll change and doing everything I can to instill a passion for knowing how thing's work, and caring about how it's made in the next generation, if only because no one ever was interested in being frank with me about all the decisions the market decided to make for me about what parts of my life I should and should not have access to.
I try to get them to pay attention to all the things people don't say, bexause that tends to be at the root of so much of the shit and wrongness in the world we're inhabiting.
Knowing how to use something is becoming more productive than externalizing that knowledge and letting someone else distill it for you. I see a future driving in the direction of retraction and a pruning of inefficiency to back off of just shoveling more and more into wasteful wank, and getting back to building what you need and taking it from there.
Then again, most of my social circles have been make-do types, so maybe I am in a bubble. I certainly know the more cosmopolitanly inclined infrequently think about things like repurposing or fixing things. I'm praying that'll change and doing everything I can to instill a passion for knowing how thing's work, and caring about how it's made in the next generation, if only because no one ever was interested in being frank with me about all the decisions the market decided to make for me about what parts of my life I should and should not have access to.
I try to get them to pay attention to all the things people don't say, bexause that tends to be at the root of so much of the shit and wrongness in the world we're inhabiting.
I'd be free to choose the version of software to run on it. If they were to, for example, put out a release that broke compatibility with a niche game that I enjoyed, I could downgrade and continue to play that game. But, honestly, it's more about the principle.
Has a release of Switch software ever broken compatibility with an already released Switch game?
How do you figure? You could also argue this restricts the switch market by only allowing capital-infused creators.
Is this any different from Apple with the iPhone?
The iPhone bothers me much more because it's a general-purpose computer.
The iPhone bothers me much more because it's a general-purpose computer.
No, it's not and has never been held out as such. iPhones are a captive market. If you bought one, you bought into the closed ecosystem. Be that for convenience or ignorance, you are now subject to the whims of Apple.
Android is another path, but perhaps just as capitalistic as Apple, but by different mechanisms.
You are always free to buy raw hardware and build your own phone from scratch, and write all the software for it.
Life is a series of compromises. Choose wisely.
Android is another path, but perhaps just as capitalistic as Apple, but by different mechanisms.
You are always free to buy raw hardware and build your own phone from scratch, and write all the software for it.
Life is a series of compromises. Choose wisely.
On a side note: a product is always a 2 party deal, and needs to be win/win.
For example increasing the price is always anti-consumer, but it might be part of the deal.
So I don't like to look at products from the perspective of 1 party, since it is always a negotiation between 2 parties where both end up with a win.
For example increasing the price is always anti-consumer, but it might be part of the deal.
So I don't like to look at products from the perspective of 1 party, since it is always a negotiation between 2 parties where both end up with a win.
I don't think it's quite as cut and dry as that. In some sense, the restrictions _enhance_ THE thing I bought it for - playing a wide range of games. A platform where piracy is trivial is less attractive to some publishers, which may mean they don't release games there, or release later than on other platforms. If the largely theoretical benefits of a more open platform (I'm simply not interested in using the hardware for other purposes, whether I can or not) cause even modest damage to the range of games available, that's not a good trade off for me.
Sony[1] with the PSP claimed that:
> There's a number of titles from American publishers that will be there, but are we getting full-line support? No. I'm not going to bullshit you on that.
> A lot of the stuff that will be announced at E3 we're very excited about, because they are huge titles. And we also believe that there's a way that you will be able to, not stop, but slow down the piracy in the first 30 to 60 days from a tech perspective. [...] That's been the biggest problem, no question about it. It's become a very difficult proposition to be profitable, given the piracy right now.
Of course they're incentivised to portray piracy as damaging to the platform even if it isn't changing publisher decision making to any significant extent, but it's an argument that makes sense, and I find it difficult to believe that it wasn't dampening publisher enthusiasm to at least some extent.
In some ways, I'd like to see a phased path to openness, where say ten years down the line or when official support is dropped, some of the barriers are taken away (most platforms get there anyway due to third party efforts, and as Sony allude to above, _slowing_ piracy can be sufficient), even if only to aid game preservation and avoid games being forever tied to a particular physical hardware platform.
[1] Specifically, Sony Computer Entertainment America's then senior vice president of publisher relations, Rob Dyer - https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/133097/the_sony_situa...
Sony[1] with the PSP claimed that:
> There's a number of titles from American publishers that will be there, but are we getting full-line support? No. I'm not going to bullshit you on that.
> A lot of the stuff that will be announced at E3 we're very excited about, because they are huge titles. And we also believe that there's a way that you will be able to, not stop, but slow down the piracy in the first 30 to 60 days from a tech perspective. [...] That's been the biggest problem, no question about it. It's become a very difficult proposition to be profitable, given the piracy right now.
Of course they're incentivised to portray piracy as damaging to the platform even if it isn't changing publisher decision making to any significant extent, but it's an argument that makes sense, and I find it difficult to believe that it wasn't dampening publisher enthusiasm to at least some extent.
In some ways, I'd like to see a phased path to openness, where say ten years down the line or when official support is dropped, some of the barriers are taken away (most platforms get there anyway due to third party efforts, and as Sony allude to above, _slowing_ piracy can be sufficient), even if only to aid game preservation and avoid games being forever tied to a particular physical hardware platform.
[1] Specifically, Sony Computer Entertainment America's then senior vice president of publisher relations, Rob Dyer - https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/133097/the_sony_situa...
The switch is 3 years old and - as the other comments have noted - this technique is much older. Yet, on a website for self-styled hackers, so many are learning about it for the first time. Did people really care that much?
If the device depends on write-once ROM that was written in the factory, is that also anti-consumer?
If the device depends on write-once ROM that was written in the factory, is that also anti-consumer?
> If the device depends on write-once ROM that was written in the factory, is that also anti-consumer?
That depends on the intent.
That depends on the intent.
As far as i know Nintendo is the only console maker still having region locks and being extremely fussy about transferring your purchases when your hardware dies/is replaced.
I'd call THAT anti consumer.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but that's the impression I got from reading here and there and the reason I don't own Nintendo products.
I'd call THAT anti consumer.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but that's the impression I got from reading here and there and the reason I don't own Nintendo products.
Nintendo’s portable systems (going back to the Game Boy and including the Switch) have never had region locks, on the logic that somebody might want to buy a new game while traveling. The consoles (except for Switch) do, though.
3DS was region locked - I had to import a Japanese 3DS to play the Japanese version of Persona Q2 (or I could have used CFW, but I didn't want to risk the downloaded content I have).
The 3ds did have region locks on it. I think the rest didn't.
Funny enough, that's when I wanted to buy a Nintendo portable. 3D without glasses seemed interesting. Then I noticed that not many games are available in eastern europe and I wasn't willing to jump through hoops to give them my money.
The Nintendo Switch is not region locked. You can play any game from any region on it.
Moving to new hardware is more complicated than it needs to be but is not restrictive.
Moving to new hardware is more complicated than it needs to be but is not restrictive.
Ok that's new. I last checked when they had the ... whatever the first console with motion controllers was called.
So are you absolutely sure that I can buy Nintendo stuff today and get games from anywhere in the world? Because my local selection is laughably small and crappy, and combined with region locks it meant it's not worth the trouble.
So are you absolutely sure that I can buy Nintendo stuff today and get games from anywhere in the world? Because my local selection is laughably small and crappy, and combined with region locks it meant it's not worth the trouble.
The Wii is the console you are thinking of. And that console came out in 2006. So I'm surprised you decided that things haven't changed in 14 years.
> So are you absolutely sure that I can buy Nintendo stuff today and get games from anywhere in the world?
Yes, absolutely sure. You just need to create an eShop account for each region. There are countless articles on how to do this.
> So are you absolutely sure that I can buy Nintendo stuff today and get games from anywhere in the world?
Yes, absolutely sure. You just need to create an eShop account for each region. There are countless articles on how to do this.
Absolutely certain. It's in Nintendo's FAQs[1] and I have played physical games from the EU, US, and Japan on my EU Switch, and have accounts for both the UK and Japanese eShops.
[1] https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Support/Nintendo-Switch/Regional-...
[1] https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Support/Nintendo-Switch/Regional-...
> So are you absolutely sure that I can buy Nintendo stuff today and get games from anywhere in the world?
Yes, I have a UK switch that I got (it was the diablo bundle), I have a uk switch account and a us switch account. Diablo works fine. All my us purchased switch games (physical) and downloaded games from the us store on this uk switch.
Yes, I have a UK switch that I got (it was the diablo bundle), I have a uk switch account and a us switch account. Diablo works fine. All my us purchased switch games (physical) and downloaded games from the us store on this uk switch.
>whatever the first console with motion controllers was called.
Nintendo Puerile Joke (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4953650.stm).
Nintendo Puerile Joke (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4953650.stm).
> The Wii is the console you are thinking of. And that console came out in 2006. So I'm surprised you decided that things haven't changed in 14 years.
I didn't grow up with gameboys but with the zx spectrum, I don't have a childhood attachment to Nintendo. Once in a while (3-5 years) I think it would be good to check what they offer, but usually there's a hoop i have to jump through and it also requires spending money on a new console in addition to my PS3/4 so...
> So are you absolutely sure that I can buy Nintendo stuff today and get games from anywhere in the world?
> Yes, absolutely sure. You just need to create an eShop account for each region. There are countless articles on how to do this.
I was thinking of physical purchases :)
I didn't grow up with gameboys but with the zx spectrum, I don't have a childhood attachment to Nintendo. Once in a while (3-5 years) I think it would be good to check what they offer, but usually there's a hoop i have to jump through and it also requires spending money on a new console in addition to my PS3/4 so...
> So are you absolutely sure that I can buy Nintendo stuff today and get games from anywhere in the world?
> Yes, absolutely sure. You just need to create an eShop account for each region. There are countless articles on how to do this.
I was thinking of physical purchases :)
I've had Japanese and European cartridges in my Switch without issues. (Haven't tried American cartridges yet despite owning four.)
Justify to whom? I am a consumer and this is irrelevant to me. And Nintendo has always been aggressively fighting emulation/homebrew, so it is nothing new.
They sell the machine as a single purpose box that plays games sold by them in their store.
If someone buys it expecting something different that's really on them.
If someone buys it expecting something different that's really on them.
This is not anti-consumer as consumers don’t care, nor running homebrew or pirated games are supported or advertised features. This is something that target precisely people who doesn’t want to be consumer: those that want to get and play games for free. Now, there is also the very very minor homebrew community, which should buy a devkit instead if running code is their main goal.
Devkits are not available to the general public, only to licensed developers who signed NDAs, and are severely restricted in how they can distribute their software.
>>This is not anti-consumer as consumers don’t care
consumers "caring" about something is not the definition of Anti-Consumer at all, there are all manner of business practices that have been made illegal because they were anti-consumer that the majority of consumers did not care about (and still do not). For example the Warranty if Removed Stickers on electronics. Most consumers do not care if the manufacturers place them on devices however this practice is very much Anti-Consumer and is illegal in the US
>> This is something that target precisely people who doesn’t want to be consumer: those that want to get and play games for free.
Ahh yes, If I want complete control over my device, what to use my device in a non-standard way, or some other reason I do not want a manufacturer to permanently alter my device with a firmware change it must mean I only oppose it because I want free games...
I also oppose the war on drugs, do i only do that because I want to get high as well? or is it a fundamental ethical reason around property ownership and the role of manufacturers as SELLERS not leasing agents of a device
consumers "caring" about something is not the definition of Anti-Consumer at all, there are all manner of business practices that have been made illegal because they were anti-consumer that the majority of consumers did not care about (and still do not). For example the Warranty if Removed Stickers on electronics. Most consumers do not care if the manufacturers place them on devices however this practice is very much Anti-Consumer and is illegal in the US
>> This is something that target precisely people who doesn’t want to be consumer: those that want to get and play games for free.
Ahh yes, If I want complete control over my device, what to use my device in a non-standard way, or some other reason I do not want a manufacturer to permanently alter my device with a firmware change it must mean I only oppose it because I want free games...
I also oppose the war on drugs, do i only do that because I want to get high as well? or is it a fundamental ethical reason around property ownership and the role of manufacturers as SELLERS not leasing agents of a device
I expected this kind of comment, reinterpreting the general idea into something else I didn’t say to attack it. The "does not care" was not about abusing customers it was about why they chose one console or another. Just like people valuing the ability to tweak a device will likely more buy an Android phone than an iPhone. If someone wants a console that can execute their code, Xbox One is the way to go (or a PS3 with an old fireware). If on the contrary they don’t care about that, then the Switch is totally OK.
Now the ironical thing is I didn’t even disagree with you rant. Actually I’m all for more open devices. What I’m saying is that it’s not possible right now, so buying a Switch with the expectation that it will run third party code is living in a parallel universe.
Now the ironical thing is I didn’t even disagree with you rant. Actually I’m all for more open devices. What I’m saying is that it’s not possible right now, so buying a Switch with the expectation that it will run third party code is living in a parallel universe.
Maybe this is a dumb question, but can these fuses be blown by accident? Eg: too much power in the switch. How do they mitigate this?
Are these fuses extremely small? I would assume they’re easy to bypass otherwise.
They are produced by lithography and are on the actual die of the system-on-chip that contains the processor. I believe they're IBM's eFUSE technology on Tegra, but antifuses have been used for similar purposes:
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/IBM-System-z9-eFUSE-ap...
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/IBM-System-z9-eFUSE-ap...
A few questions:
1. What was the intended use case behind the Tegra having 32 blowable fuses? Did Nvidia intend for those fuses to be used in this manner?
2. What is a non-retail switch?
1. What was the intended use case behind the Tegra having 32 blowable fuses? Did Nvidia intend for those fuses to be used in this manner?
2. What is a non-retail switch?
Fuses and OTP are a very common thing to throw in to systems.
Most microcontrollers offer capabilities like this, and now they're drifting into more general purpose, larger SOCs.
Maybe you use it to keep a serial number, or to separate product families, or for something like this.
Tegra's main purpose of the fuses is to handle holding cryptographic keys, boot parameters, and to disable the debug port. But since they have a fuse unit already, they provide a few words for the end-user to use as they please.
I too am curious what "non-retail" means in this context.
Tegra's main purpose of the fuses is to handle holding cryptographic keys, boot parameters, and to disable the debug port. But since they have a fuse unit already, they provide a few words for the end-user to use as they please.
I too am curious what "non-retail" means in this context.
Lots of system-on-chip devices have an array of fuses. Usually there's one for "permanently turn off JTAG" after factory testing, and most of the rest will be user-defined. Other uses include embedding serial numbers and cryptographic keys.
One common use case of the fuses is to prevent attack vectors which downgrade software to a vulnerable version. Using the OTP fuses older versions can be prevented from running to some extend.
1. Most likely - Switch isn't the first console which used fuses like this. Xbox 360 had them as well.
This was already in use in other game system (for example the xbox 360, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_eFUSE )
The article explicit says that on the very first paragraph.
Also in use in Samsung smartphones: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Knox#e-fuse
It backfires like this : users are trained to never upgrade. Games that target a specific version lose sales.
In practice users don't even know what version they're on
I don't think this applies to consoles like the Switch. I don't think the average user ever feels the need to revert to an earlier firmware version, and games don't target particular firmware versions. They tend to just work.
As a user, I feel Nintendo has been pretty good about updates: they don't update a lot, and each updates has user facing features with QOL improvements.
It's not in the same situation as iOS updates that were effectively slowing down the devices or Windows Update that don't seem to the user to bring anything.
It's not in the same situation as iOS updates that were effectively slowing down the devices or Windows Update that don't seem to the user to bring anything.
> each updates has user facing features with QOL improvements
You must be joking. The meme about "stability intensifies" with Switch updates isn't just a joke. Most of their updates are minor bugfixes and "increasing stability" (fixing exploits). They're far more interested in fixing exploits than they ever were in improving the OS in any meaningful way for the user. It's been 3 years and the only major QOL change I see on that list is making the all software page not useless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Switch_system_softwar...
You must be joking. The meme about "stability intensifies" with Switch updates isn't just a joke. Most of their updates are minor bugfixes and "increasing stability" (fixing exploits). They're far more interested in fixing exploits than they ever were in improving the OS in any meaningful way for the user. It's been 3 years and the only major QOL change I see on that list is making the all software page not useless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Switch_system_softwar...
The only regression that seemed widespread was the joycon drift on pro controller (which was bad, but fixed within a week).
Otherwise heavy Splatoon players might be hit more than others, but the stability improvements seemed real. At some point the Switch had to be rebooted every other day, nowadays it's something not needed in weeks perhaps.
For QOL the last big update allowing to remap buttons was a big deal. I haven't tried moving data between to the SD card but it would also be a big deal for people with more than 10 ~ 20 games, as space becomes scarce pretty fast.
Otherwise heavy Splatoon players might be hit more than others, but the stability improvements seemed real. At some point the Switch had to be rebooted every other day, nowadays it's something not needed in weeks perhaps.
For QOL the last big update allowing to remap buttons was a big deal. I haven't tried moving data between to the SD card but it would also be a big deal for people with more than 10 ~ 20 games, as space becomes scarce pretty fast.
> but the stability improvements seemed real. At some point the Switch had to be rebooted every other day
No idea what you're talking about.
> For QOL the last big update allowing to remap buttons was a big deal. I haven't tried moving data between to the SD card but it would also be a big deal for people with more than 10 ~ 20 games, as space becomes scarce pretty fast.
My point is that the amount of real QOL changes is extremely low for the amount of time the console has been out. There's been nearly nothing, while they just keep "increasing stability".
Frankly, the Switch's OS is still incredibly barebones and missing a lot of QOL features and I'm tired of people defending Nintendo for being so half-assed about the Switch. It's been three years. There's been barely any progress, whether it's the OS, online infrastructure, or fixing the drift issues. Do they have Yakuza debts they need to pay off or what? Where's all the money going to?
No idea what you're talking about.
> For QOL the last big update allowing to remap buttons was a big deal. I haven't tried moving data between to the SD card but it would also be a big deal for people with more than 10 ~ 20 games, as space becomes scarce pretty fast.
My point is that the amount of real QOL changes is extremely low for the amount of time the console has been out. There's been nearly nothing, while they just keep "increasing stability".
Frankly, the Switch's OS is still incredibly barebones and missing a lot of QOL features and I'm tired of people defending Nintendo for being so half-assed about the Switch. It's been three years. There's been barely any progress, whether it's the OS, online infrastructure, or fixing the drift issues. Do they have Yakuza debts they need to pay off or what? Where's all the money going to?
> No idea what you're talking about.
After some hours (10 ? 20?) of play on a few intensive games, it was slowing down and/or becoming glitchy. The fan would not ramp up so it didn't seem to be temperature.
I thought it was an isolated issue until a saw a few streamers hit the same kind of issue and casually explain they forgot to reboot their switch.
> It's been three years.
I get your point. I kinda gave up on expecting shiny revolutionary features, or comparing to the PS or Xbox.
My angle on it is pretty similar to when the iPhone came out. There was no copy and paste, multi-tasking and was arguably slow for a lot of things, but the pros outweighed the cons, and we knew Apple wouldn't be doing any big leaps any day soon.
I'm still frustrated by iOS by the way, but still think it's worth it.
Nintendo's Switch is at that place for me at this point. I'll buy a PS5 anyway, and I'll be happy if Nintendo continues to bring new games and paradigms on the table that the other makers are not touching.
After some hours (10 ? 20?) of play on a few intensive games, it was slowing down and/or becoming glitchy. The fan would not ramp up so it didn't seem to be temperature.
I thought it was an isolated issue until a saw a few streamers hit the same kind of issue and casually explain they forgot to reboot their switch.
> It's been three years.
I get your point. I kinda gave up on expecting shiny revolutionary features, or comparing to the PS or Xbox.
My angle on it is pretty similar to when the iPhone came out. There was no copy and paste, multi-tasking and was arguably slow for a lot of things, but the pros outweighed the cons, and we knew Apple wouldn't be doing any big leaps any day soon.
I'm still frustrated by iOS by the way, but still think it's worth it.
Nintendo's Switch is at that place for me at this point. I'll buy a PS5 anyway, and I'll be happy if Nintendo continues to bring new games and paradigms on the table that the other makers are not touching.
> I thought it was an isolated issue until a saw a few streamers hit the same kind of issue and casually explain they forgot to reboot their switch.
Interesting, thanks. I sold my Switch after a year, so I've only been following up on it intermittently and missed this.
> My angle on it is pretty similar to when the iPhone came out. There was no copy and paste, multi-tasking and was arguably slow for a lot of things, but the pros outweighed the cons, and we knew Apple wouldn't be doing any big leaps any day soon.
I was okay with the Switch's OS in the beginning because I figured, sure, they rushed this to market, but this is a relatively solid basis to keep building and improving on. None of which happened. Queue my frustration with Nintendo.
I do feel by comparison iOS has made leaps and bounds (though admittedly, depending on what features you wanted, it might have taken longer than you might have wanted). I've since switched to Android (again), but I think there was a very long period where I'd stay up to watch the Apple conference revealing the new phones and iOS features, even when I didn't have any Apple device. As far as I can remember, every year brought significant changes, though of course I can't point out what they were for every year. The introduction of the concept of files and a file manager made iOS much more palatable to me, for example.
edit: https://www.theverge.com/2011/12/13/2612736/ios-history-ipho...
Wanted to take a look. iOS 4 added multitasking. iOS 5 added the notification center, iTunes wifi sync, OTA updates, iMessage. iOS 6 added, uh, .... the beloved Apple Maps? iOS 7 was the visual overhaul, added the control center (which I miss on Android), AirDrop, Camera and Photos were improved, multitasking was greatly improved, TouchID was added, apps automatically updating added.
Seems like there was a fairly steady stream of improvements almost every year. SwitchOS hasn't seen anything remotely close. Of course, Apple is a much larger company and has a much larger budget, but still, I think regardless of how large or small a company, it should be capable of yearly improvements from whatever place they're at any given time.
Interesting, thanks. I sold my Switch after a year, so I've only been following up on it intermittently and missed this.
> My angle on it is pretty similar to when the iPhone came out. There was no copy and paste, multi-tasking and was arguably slow for a lot of things, but the pros outweighed the cons, and we knew Apple wouldn't be doing any big leaps any day soon.
I was okay with the Switch's OS in the beginning because I figured, sure, they rushed this to market, but this is a relatively solid basis to keep building and improving on. None of which happened. Queue my frustration with Nintendo.
I do feel by comparison iOS has made leaps and bounds (though admittedly, depending on what features you wanted, it might have taken longer than you might have wanted). I've since switched to Android (again), but I think there was a very long period where I'd stay up to watch the Apple conference revealing the new phones and iOS features, even when I didn't have any Apple device. As far as I can remember, every year brought significant changes, though of course I can't point out what they were for every year. The introduction of the concept of files and a file manager made iOS much more palatable to me, for example.
edit: https://www.theverge.com/2011/12/13/2612736/ios-history-ipho...
Wanted to take a look. iOS 4 added multitasking. iOS 5 added the notification center, iTunes wifi sync, OTA updates, iMessage. iOS 6 added, uh, .... the beloved Apple Maps? iOS 7 was the visual overhaul, added the control center (which I miss on Android), AirDrop, Camera and Photos were improved, multitasking was greatly improved, TouchID was added, apps automatically updating added.
Seems like there was a fairly steady stream of improvements almost every year. SwitchOS hasn't seen anything remotely close. Of course, Apple is a much larger company and has a much larger budget, but still, I think regardless of how large or small a company, it should be capable of yearly improvements from whatever place they're at any given time.
It was a meme adopted from the 3DS hacking community.
Anyway, I still remember the first year that the switch came out when everyone thought “maybe this next update will add bluetooth audio”.
Seriously. Other Tegra X1 devices have bluetooth audio. Why can I not use my wireless earbuds on a portable device with all of the technical capability to use them? Is it really such a big ask to enable this most basic of feature?
Anyway, I still remember the first year that the switch came out when everyone thought “maybe this next update will add bluetooth audio”.
Seriously. Other Tegra X1 devices have bluetooth audio. Why can I not use my wireless earbuds on a portable device with all of the technical capability to use them? Is it really such a big ask to enable this most basic of feature?
There is an easy workaround developed by the Switch homebrew community, simply upgrade from within a custom firmware (such as Atmosphere-NX) and run a tool called ChoiDuJourNX which bypasses the fuse-burning.
If you're careful you can keep a backup trail going all the way back to your original device firmware and restore/downgrade it using the Hekate system tool. It has already been pointed out that there isn't much reason to do this, AFAIK the main reason people either held out on older firmwares or kept up a backup trail to them was in order to take advantage of possible firmware-version-specific exploits, the gold standard being a coldboot exploit.
If you're careful you can keep a backup trail going all the way back to your original device firmware and restore/downgrade it using the Hekate system tool. It has already been pointed out that there isn't much reason to do this, AFAIK the main reason people either held out on older firmwares or kept up a backup trail to them was in order to take advantage of possible firmware-version-specific exploits, the gold standard being a coldboot exploit.
The reason this "easy workaround" works at all is that there is a BootROM exploit that trivially allows running arbitrary code in the BootROM. This allows us to run our own bootloader instead of Nintendo's, bypassing their fuse burning logic. Had Nvidia not fucked up their USB implementation (along with other part of their platform), this would have been harder to bypass.
[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchHacks/comments/7rq0cu/jamais_...
[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/SwitchHacks/comments/7rq0cu/jamais_...
I don't want to sound like I'm pontificating or defecating on the corporacy at everyone's favorite hardware company but it strikes me that these sorts of lapses are cultural and stem from this tedious emphasis everyone places on having "relaxed working environments"[0]
Does it surprise you that the product of this culture also has relaxed security characteristics?
[0] https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/about-nvidia/culture-at-nvidia/
Does it surprise you that the product of this culture also has relaxed security characteristics?
[0] https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/about-nvidia/culture-at-nvidia/
Ah yes, compared to every other company that has never had an exploit ever.
Thank you for making me laugh in these trying times.
I gotta keep it real for you sir banana, the only way to have a legit conversation on this platform is to have an equal number of up and downvotes.
And for those who stayed on the 4.1.0 fuseset (or certain versions below that) there are warmboot exploits available. So those who are able to "normally" boot those firmwares do not need to use AutoRCM (or an RCM-"jig") to access RCM anymore.
While this is true, I was essentially saying that you don't have to remain on an older firmware as long as you're careful about how you move around between versions. I'm on 10.0 but I could go back to 3.1.0 anytime, and then move somewhere in between those versions if we got a coldboot exploit for example (which according to notable members of the Switch homebrew community is not likely).
Yeah, sure, you can ignore the fuses, but only if you assist the boot process using a jig and an injected payload. The stock Horizon kernel from FW 10.3 won't boot if your fuseset is for 3.1.0, unless you inject a chainloader which fakes the fuseset or removes the check.
Edit: I see what you were referring to, I was unspecific in my comment, updated it!
Edit: I see what you were referring to, I was unspecific in my comment, updated it!
I'm unclear on how these hardware fuses actually work. Are they actual fuses that can be burnt on will by excessive power?
When the article says:
> The boot loader verifies a specific fuse, FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7, to prevent downgrading. Each software version expects a different number of fuses to be blown [...]
Does this mean FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7 actually contains multiple fuses?
When the article says:
> The boot loader verifies a specific fuse, FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7, to prevent downgrading. Each software version expects a different number of fuses to be blown [...]
Does this mean FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7 actually contains multiple fuses?
"Fuses" in this context are just non-volatile memory that cannot be reset. Once a bit is set to 1, it stays there. They're often used for configuration and for things like sealing off programming/readout on microcontrollers.
FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7 is 32 bits wide, hence contains "32 fuses". The system has many fuses, but 256 bits (RESERVED_ODM0-RESERVED_ODM7) are for the device manufacturers to use for their own purpose, which is what Nintendo is doing here.
FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7 is 32 bits wide, hence contains "32 fuses". The system has many fuses, but 256 bits (RESERVED_ODM0-RESERVED_ODM7) are for the device manufacturers to use for their own purpose, which is what Nintendo is doing here.
On some chips they are literally bits of polysilicon that burn. On most devices they're flash memory that doesn't have any circuitry to do erases.
You're thinking microcontrollers with flash. This is not one of those.
Modern high performance CPUs/SoCs do not contain flash, ever (the processes are incompatible). When we talk about SoC fuses, we mean real fuses (or antifuses), not the Flash "fuses" of some microcontrollers (which can be erased with UV light).
Actual technologies vary. It could be fuses (metal, polysilicon, or other) or antifuses (e.g. gate oxide breakdown, "blown" means it conducts), but they're all irreversible.
Modern high performance CPUs/SoCs do not contain flash, ever (the processes are incompatible). When we talk about SoC fuses, we mean real fuses (or antifuses), not the Flash "fuses" of some microcontrollers (which can be erased with UV light).
Actual technologies vary. It could be fuses (metal, polysilicon, or other) or antifuses (e.g. gate oxide breakdown, "blown" means it conducts), but they're all irreversible.
They are the same concept, yes, but implemented in silicon; this short paper shows how it works with diagrams and a microscope photo. https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/fowler/papers/2010.6.pdf
> I'm unclear on how these hardware fuses actually work. Are they actual fuses that can be burnt on will by excessive power?
No, they're not like the fuses in your house. These can be blown by software to irrevocably change something which can then be verified later, or in other cases to prevent reprogramming of a microcontroller (which can be programmed only if the programming fuse is still intact.
>Does this mean FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7 actually contains multiple fuses?
No, that's the name of one fuse. Once you upgrade the device next time, the upgrade tool would, for example, blow FUSE_RESERVED_ODM8; older software would verify that this fuse (and the higher-numbered ones) are NOT blown, and refuse to boot otherwise.
No, they're not like the fuses in your house. These can be blown by software to irrevocably change something which can then be verified later, or in other cases to prevent reprogramming of a microcontroller (which can be programmed only if the programming fuse is still intact.
>Does this mean FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7 actually contains multiple fuses?
No, that's the name of one fuse. Once you upgrade the device next time, the upgrade tool would, for example, blow FUSE_RESERVED_ODM8; older software would verify that this fuse (and the higher-numbered ones) are NOT blown, and refuse to boot otherwise.
> No, that's the name of one fuse.
No, it's a 32-bit segment belonging to the 256-bit odm_reserved segment. FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7 is specifically the last 32-bit segment.
Some fuse information can be read here: https://docs.nvidia.com/jetson/archives/l4t-archived/l4t-323....
No, it's a 32-bit segment belonging to the 256-bit odm_reserved segment. FUSE_RESERVED_ODM7 is specifically the last 32-bit segment.
Some fuse information can be read here: https://docs.nvidia.com/jetson/archives/l4t-archived/l4t-323....
Thanks! Definitely more clear.
Why do they bother with this if someone is going to make a software workaround? Seems like people who would look to downgrade firmware might also be the same that would be able to implement the workaround.
Apathy. The vast majority of consumers won't bother. Also, the Switch's security was actually comparatively solid. It was a flaw in the Tegra X1 (thanks Nvidia!) component that led to an exploit being discovered.
> There are 256 bits in the set of ODM_RESERVED fuses, and there are 8 ODM_RESERVED. This allows for 32 fuses, or 32 future FW versions (provided they burn a fuse on every major release).
Can someone explain how the author gets from the numbers 256 and 8 to the count of 32 fuses?
Can someone explain how the author gets from the numbers 256 and 8 to the count of 32 fuses?
Fuses are in 32 bit words. There are 8 such words available for ODM usage, giving a total of 256 fuse bits. However, of those only one word is used for the anti-downgrade stuff. So that's just 32 firmware levels.
What happens if some hacker finds a remote exploit and starts blowing all the fuses on people's devices?
Local exploits are popular anyway, trick people into downloading the latest game which just wipes out the operating system https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2018/07/fake_nintendo_swit...
Then they can already brick your device by replacing the firmware.
This is the reason for threat models. Don't waste your time worrying about theoretical but redundant attacks.
This is the reason for threat models. Don't waste your time worrying about theoretical but redundant attacks.
If this was widespread, Nintendo would just release a firmware without fuse checks.
More like, they'd just release a firmware without the remote exploit in the first place. The consoles that got their fuses wiped would be bricked anyways, you wouldn't be able to install the firmware without fuse-checks on it through normal methods (Nintendo, however, could replace them easily).
A massive recall and a world of hurt for Nintendo and Nvidia
Nintendo switch emulator. Game over.
Clickbait title.
Shameful, honestly.