Difference between revisions of "Talk:SHSH"

From The iPhone Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Firmware 3.1(.1): new section)
Line 3: Line 3:
   
 
:I'm pretty sure the iPod touch 2G bootrom ''does'' check SHSHs, but only the one supplied in the IPSW; its restore process doesn't require getting a new SHSH from Apple's server. --[[User:Dialexio|<span style="color:#C20; font-weight:normal;">Dialexio</span>]] 20:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 
:I'm pretty sure the iPod touch 2G bootrom ''does'' check SHSHs, but only the one supplied in the IPSW; its restore process doesn't require getting a new SHSH from Apple's server. --[[User:Dialexio|<span style="color:#C20; font-weight:normal;">Dialexio</span>]] 20:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Firmware 3.1(.1) ==
  +
  +
What's the difference between 3.1 and 3.1.1? Were both released at the same time? Or is 3.1 just a "short form" for 3.1.1? If yes, we should always write the full name. -- [[User:Http|http]] 21:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:58, 20 July 2010

Just to make sure (I don't have these devices): The iPhone 3G (even the newer MC model) and the iPod Touch 2nd generation (also newer models) don't have shsh checks. (I'm not talking about the new "soft" check.) Can someone confirm this? I always thought these mentioned newer devices also have this certificate check in the Bootrom built-in. But as someone removed my listed 3G (with a question mark), I assume no 3G has this check. What is actually the difference between the old and the new Bootrom then? Maybe someone can explain how this certificate check works exactly and which software part is doing it. Thanks. -- http 11:25, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

There's definitely no SHSH checking in the iPhone 3G bootrom. If I'm not mistaken, its bootrom can't even read IMG3 files.
I'm pretty sure the iPod touch 2G bootrom does check SHSHs, but only the one supplied in the IPSW; its restore process doesn't require getting a new SHSH from Apple's server. --Dialexio 20:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Firmware 3.1(.1)

What's the difference between 3.1 and 3.1.1? Were both released at the same time? Or is 3.1 just a "short form" for 3.1.1? If yes, we should always write the full name. -- http 21:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)