[HN Gopher] Codex Hacked a Samsung TV
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Codex Hacked a Samsung TV
        
       Author : campuscodi
       Score  : 194 points
       Date   : 2026-04-16 10:44 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.calif.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.calif.io)
        
       | endymion-light wrote:
       | While cool and slightly scary news - Samsung TV's have been
       | incredibly hackable for the past decade, wouldn't be surprised if
       | GPT2 with access to a browser could hack a Samsung!
        
         | valleyer wrote:
         | This is some serious revisionist history. GPT-2 wasn't
         | instruction-following or even conversational.
        
           | patrickmcnamara wrote:
           | Hyperbole.
        
             | jdiff wrote:
             | It's really not. It was a fun toy but had very little
             | utility. It could generate plausible looking text that
             | collapsed immediately upon any amount of inspection or even
             | just attention. Code generation wasn't even a twinkle in
             | Altman's eye scanning orbs at that point.
        
               | tomalbrc wrote:
               | Talking about revisionist...
        
               | smoghat wrote:
               | But like Mythos, it was too dangerous to release.
               | 
               | https://slate.com/technology/2019/02/openai-gpt2-text-
               | genera...
        
               | wongarsu wrote:
               | And the "too dangerous to release" capability was writing
               | somewhat plausible news articles based on a headline or
               | handwritten beginning of an article. In the same style as
               | what you had written
               | 
               | Today we call that "advanced autocomplete", but at the
               | time OpenAI managed to generate a lot of hype about how
               | this would lead to an unstoppable flood of disinformation
               | if they allowed the wrong people access to this dangerous
               | tool. Even the original gpt3 was still behind waitlists
               | with manual approval
        
               | someguyiguess wrote:
               | And as it turns out, they were correct.
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | I think you misunderstand the comment you replied to.
               | They are saying the above comment was a rhetorical
               | exaggeration of GPT-2's capabilities as a commentary on
               | how low quality Samsung TV software is. They don't
               | actually think GPT-2 was very capable. It is a figure of
               | speech, not a literal statement.
        
             | valleyer wrote:
             | If so, I apologize.
        
           | endymion-light wrote:
           | it's a joke about the quality of samsung tv's rather than a
           | serious comment - i should have said a perceptron could hack
           | a samsung tv
        
           | michaelcampbell wrote:
           | And yet Dario in his OpenAI days was proclaiming it too scary
           | to be released.
           | 
           | Now why does that sound familiar...?
        
       | reactordev wrote:
       | The trick here was providing the firmware source code so it could
       | see your vulnerabilities.
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | That's a pretty big gimme!
        
         | petee wrote:
         | What would be the difficulty level for it to just read the
         | machine code; are these models heavily relying on human
         | language for clues?
        
           | wongarsu wrote:
           | Reasoning on pure machine code or disassembly is still hit
           | and miss. For better results you can run the binary through a
           | disassembler, then ask an llm to turn that into an equivalent
           | c program, then ask it to work on that. But some of the
           | subtleties might get lost in translation
        
             | orwin wrote:
             | If you put codex in Xhigh and allow it access to tools, it
             | will take an hour but it will eventually give you back
             | quality recompiled code, with the same issues the original
             | had (here quality means readable)
        
               | bryancoxwell wrote:
               | I had a bit of a pain of a time trying to get Claude to
               | work with ghidra. What you're describing seems like a
               | better alternative, would you agree?
        
               | skywal_l wrote:
               | You can tweak the current Ghidra MCP to work in headless
               | mode. It makes things much easier.
        
               | ctoth wrote:
               | I've had a lot of luck with pyghidra-mcp -- give it a try
               | :)
        
               | cute_boi wrote:
               | Well i have tried and it only works for simple use-case.
        
           | lynx97 wrote:
           | It will have to use a disassembler, or write one. I recently
           | casually asked gpt-5.4 to translate the content of a MIDI
           | file to a custom sound programming language. It just wrote a
           | one-shot MIDI parser in Python, grabbed the data, and
           | basically did a perfect translation at first try. Nice.
        
             | StilesCrisis wrote:
             | I've seen Claude do similar things for image files. Don't
             | have PNG parsing utilities installed? No worries, it'll
             | just synthesize a Python script to decode the image
             | directly.
        
           | dnautics wrote:
           | I have had Claude read usbpcap to reverse engineer an
           | industrial digital camera link. It was like pulling teeth but
           | I got it done (I would not have been able to do it alone)
        
           | estimator7292 wrote:
           | I had Claude reverse some firmware. I gave it headless ghidra
           | and it spat out documentation for the internal serial
           | protocol I was interested in. With the right tools, it seems
           | to do pretty well with this kind of task.
        
         | russdill wrote:
         | It's not a far step from having the firmware binaries and doing
         | analysis with ghidra, etc.
        
       | varispeed wrote:
       | Codex exploited or you exploited? It's like saying a hammer drove
       | a nail, without acknowledging the hand and the force it exerted
       | and the human brain behind it.
        
         | par1970 wrote:
         | Do you have a defense of why human-hammer-nail is a good
         | analogy for human-chatgpt5.4-pwndsamsung?
        
           | BLKNSLVR wrote:
           | AI without a suitably well crafted prompt is like a firework
           | tube held by a 3 year old.
           | 
           | AI without a prompt is a hammer sitting in a drawer.
        
         | croes wrote:
         | If I just point to the wall and say "nail" then I would day the
         | hammer drive the nail
        
           | saintfire wrote:
           | You didn't, you figured out where the nail needs to go, got
           | the nail and then swung the hammer until the nail was driven.
           | 
           | This is really just closer to a drill in that it automated
           | the grunt work with full guidance.
        
         | freedomben wrote:
         | Feels like the truth is somewhere in between. For example if it
         | was a "smart" hammer and you could tell your hammer "go pound
         | in those nails" and it pounded in the wrong ones, or did it too
         | hard, or something, that feels more equivalent. You would still
         | be blamed for your ambiguous prompt, and fault/liability is
         | ultimately on you the hammer director, but it still wasn't you
         | who chose the exact nails to hammer on.
         | 
         | I also think taking credit for writing an exploit that you
         | didn't write and may not even have the knowledge to do yourself
         | is a bit gray.
        
         | Glemllksdf wrote:
         | Wrong questions.
         | 
         | Could a script kiddy stear an LLM? How much does this reduce
         | the cost of attacks? Can this scale?
         | 
         | What does this mean for the future of cyber security?
        
         | Zigurd wrote:
         | You could call the LLMs role "smart grep," and mean it to be
         | derisive. But I would have gladly used a real smart grep.
        
       | ckbkr10 wrote:
       | Even with all the constraints that others criticize here it is
       | pretty amazing.
       | 
       | Give an experienced human this tool at hand he can achieve
       | exploitation with only a few steering inputs.
       | 
       | Cool stuff
        
       | alfanick wrote:
       | I had truly good "hacking" session with Codex. It's not hacking,
       | I wasn't breaking anything, just jumping over the fences TP-Link
       | put for me, owning the router, inside the network, knowing the
       | admin password. But TP-Link really tried everything so you cannot
       | access the router you own via API. They really tried to be smart
       | with some very very broken and custom auth and encryption scheme.
       | It took some half a day with Codex, but in the end I have a
       | pretty Python API to access _my_ router, tested, reliable, and
       | exporting beautiful Prometheus metrics.
       | 
       | I'm sure there is some over eager product manager sitting in such
       | companies, trying to splits markets into customer and enterprise
       | sections, just by making APIs not useable by humans and adding
       | 200% useless "security by obscurity".
        
         | srcreigh wrote:
         | Any tips to share? I tried to do something similar but failed.
         | 
         | My router has a backup/restore feature with an encrypted
         | export, I figured I could use that to control or at least
         | inspect all of its state, but I/codex could not figure out the
         | encryption.
        
           | alfanick wrote:
           | It's on my long list of projects "to-opensource" (but I need
           | to figure out licensing, for those things CC-BY-SA I think is
           | the way to go), I don't want a random lawyer sitting on my
           | ass though.
           | 
           | I started with a simple assumption: if I can access the
           | router via web-browser, then I can also automate that. From
           | that the proof-of-concept was headless Chrome in Docker and
           | AI-directed code (code written via LLM, not using it all the
           | time) that uses Selenium to navigate the code. This worked,
           | but it internally hurt me to run 300MiB browser just to
           | access like 200B of metrics every 10s or so. So from there we
           | (me + codex) worked together towards reverse engineering
           | their minimised JS and their funky encryption scheme, and it
           | eventually worked (in the end it's just OpenSSL with some
           | useless paddings here or there). Give it a shot, it's a fun
           | day adventure. :)
           | 
           | Edit: that's the end result (kinda, I have whole infra around
           | it, and another story with WiFi extender with another semi-
           | broken different encryption scheme from the same provider) -
           | https://imgur.com/a/VGbNmBp
        
             | mtud wrote:
             | You should give codex access to the mobile app :) The app,
             | for a lot of routers, connects via an ssh tunnel to UDP/TCP
             | sockets on the router. Would probably give you access to
             | more data/control.
        
               | ropbear wrote:
               | Made a comment up above, but that's tdpServer and
               | tmpServer (sometimes tdpd and tmpd) and it's what I use
               | in my python implementation of tmpcli, the (somewhat
               | broken) client binary on some TP-Link devices.
               | 
               | You're correct, it gives you access to everything the
               | Tether app can do.
               | 
               | https://github.com/ropbear/tmpcli
        
               | mtud wrote:
               | I had been trying to find that again! It was instrumental
               | in some RE/VR I did last year on tmp and the differences
               | between the UDP socket (available without auth) and the
               | TCP socket. Thanks for making that.
               | 
               | I can't remember the details of the scheme, but it also
               | allows you to authenticate using your TPLink cloud
               | credential. If my memory is correct, the username is
               | md5(tplink_account_email) and the password is the cloud
               | account password. If you care, I can find my notes on
               | that to confirm.
        
             | TurkTurkleton wrote:
             | For what it's worth, the Creative Commons organization
             | recommends against using CC licenses on software:
             | https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-apply-a-creative-
             | comm...
        
             | JTbane wrote:
             | Why not just use the GPL? It basically covers the same
             | stuff Creative Commons Share-alike does.
        
               | alfanick wrote:
               | I don't feel like I own the code itself (hey, GPT wrote
               | 99.5% of it), I own the product and the thought process
               | and everything that lead to it - do whatever you want,
               | just don't forget my name somewhere in the process. Feels
               | more like art project than coding project hence CC
               | license.
        
           | seer wrote:
           | I had fun "hacking" my router that turned out to be just
           | unzipping the file with slight binary modifications, it was
           | so simple in fact I just implemented it in a few lines of js,
           | even works in the browser :-D
           | 
           | https://ivank.github.io/ddecryptor/
        
         | jack_pp wrote:
         | that could make a for a nice blog / gist
        
         | tclancy wrote:
         | Would definitely be interested in this. Moved to TP Link at the
         | start of the year and I am generally very happy with it, but
         | would like to be able to interact with my router in something
         | other than their phone app.
        
           | alfanick wrote:
           | That was actually my first thought, to go through TP-Link
           | cloud (ZERO DOCS), but it was too much effort :)
        
           | DANmode wrote:
           | > Moved to TP Link at the start of the year
           | 
           | Can't understand buying them or Netgear today.
        
         | ropbear wrote:
         | Many eons ago I wrote a Python version of tmpcli for this exact
         | reason. Made some minor improvements a few years ago but
         | haven't touched it since. Curious what methodology Codex came
         | up with, I haven't revisited it since models got really good.
         | 
         | The idea is that tmpServer listens on localhost, but dropbear
         | allows port forwarding with admin creds (you'll need to specify
         | -N). That program has full device access and is the API the
         | Tether app primarily uses to interact with the device.
         | 
         | https://github.com/ropbear/tmpcli
        
           | alfanick wrote:
           | Ha kudos! I went across this project - thanks for your work
           | :) It didn't work on the specific model I own (Archer NX600).
           | 
           | My solution is really just using their pseudo-JWT over their
           | obscured APIs (with reverse-engineered names of endpoints and
           | params). Limitation is that there is still only one client
           | allowed to be authenticated at one moment, so my daemon has
           | priority and I need to stop it to actually access Admin
           | panel.
        
             | ropbear wrote:
             | Of course! Happy to contribute. As is the case with your
             | device, there's a lot of weird TP-Link firmware variants
             | (even an RTOS called TPOS based on VxWorks), so no
             | guarantee it'll work all the time. Glad there's more
             | research being done in the space!
        
             | mtud wrote:
             | We're splitting this across two threads, but if you give
             | Codex access to jadx and the Archer android app you might
             | be able to get something without that problem. The TPLink
             | management protocol has a few different "transport" types -
             | tmpcli uses SSH, but your device might only support one of
             | the other transports.
        
             | baq wrote:
             | Would be amazing if it worked with decos, these are locked
             | down so much you don't even get an admin interface inside
             | your own network.
        
         | 0x_rs wrote:
         | I've had good success doing something similar. Recording
         | requests into an .har file using the web UI and providing it
         | for analysis was a good starting point for me, orders of
         | magnitude faster than it would be without an assistant.
        
         | _doctor_love wrote:
         | If you're into it, you could always re-flash your TP-Link
         | hardware with some open-source firmware that is more automation
         | friendly. I used to be intimidated by it, but a friend showed
         | me how to do it and it's remarkably simple and pain-free
         | (provided it's a commonly supported router of course).
        
           | alfanick wrote:
           | ofc I could, but no project supports this specific hardware
           | (Archer NX600) - I'm very happy with my solution :)
        
             | m463 wrote:
             | I wonder what the effort would be to port openwrt to it? It
             | might be easy if there are adjacent routers on the same
             | chipset.
        
               | c420 wrote:
               | Generally, if the device is compatible and not new to the
               | market, openwrt has been ported or is in the process
               | (though it may not be the latest version of openwrt). You
               | can search for your device in the compatibility drop
               | downs and get the current status. If it's not listed,
               | searching the device on the openwrt forums may tell you
               | why (which is almost always the chipset).
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | I have one of these Smiirl flip counters. It runs a version of
         | OpenWrt without the web UI, but has a uhttpd to serve an api.
         | I'm hoping Mythos can help me find an exploit to get into it
         | and enable ssh since they have now disabled the simple api
         | switch that would let you turn it on.
         | 
         | https://www.smiirl.com/en/counter/facebook/5d/
        
         | stronglikedan wrote:
         | It's a shame that you can't share how you did that without
         | running afoul of DMCA Section 1201 and risking years in federal
         | prison.
        
           | bedstefar wrote:
           | ... in exactly one of this planet's countries
        
       | mschuster91 wrote:
       | > Reading the matching ntkdriver sources is also where the
       | Novatek link became clear: the tree is stamped throughout with
       | Novatek Microelectronics identifiers, so these ntk* interfaces
       | were not just opaque device names on the TV, but part of the
       | Novatek stack Samsung had shipped.
       | 
       | Lol, a true classic in the embedded world. Some hardware company
       | (it appears these guys make display panel controllers?) ships a
       | piece of hardware, half-asses a barely working driver for it,
       | another company integrates this with a bunch of other crap from
       | other vendors into a BSP, another company uses the hardware and
       | the BSP to create a product and ships it. And often enough the
       | final company doesn't even have an idea about what's going on in
       | the innards of the BSP - as long as it's running their layer of
       | slop UI and it doesn't crash half the time, it's fine, and if it
       | does, it's off to the BSP provider to fix the issues.
       | 
       | But at no stage anywhere is there a security audit, code quality
       | checks or even _hardware_ quality checks involved - part of why
       | BSPs (and embedded product firmwares in general) are full of
       | half-assed code is because often enough the drivers have to work
       | around hardware bugs  / quirks _somehow_ that are too late to fix
       | in HW because tens to hundreds of thousands of units have already
       | been produced and the software people are heavily pressured to
       | "make it work or else we gotta write off X million dollars" and
       | "make it work _fast_ because the longer you take, the more money
       | we lose on interest until we can ship the hardware and get paid
       | for it ", and if they are particularly unlucky "it MUST work
       | until deadline X because we need to get the products shipped to
       | hit Christmas/Black Friday sales windows or because we need to
       | beat <competitor> in time-to-market, it's mandatory overtime
       | until it works".
       | 
       | And that is how you get exploits so braindead easy that AI models
       | can do the job. What a disgusting world, run to the ground by
       | beancounters.
        
         | tclancy wrote:
         | Board Support Package for us civilians.
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | Yeah, sorry, assumed it was common knowledge. For those out
           | of the loop - a BSP usually consists of a frankensteined
           | mess: a bootloader (often u-boot but sometimes something
           | homebrew), a Linux kernel with a ton of proprietary modules
           | and device-specific hacks to work around HW quirks, basic
           | userspace utilities (often buildroot), some bastardized build
           | tooling building all of that, some solution for firmware
           | upgrades and distribution, and demo programs to prove the
           | hardware actually works.
           | 
           | Most of the BSP is GPL'd software where the final product
           | manufacturer should provide the sources to the general
           | public, but all too often that obligation gets sharted upon,
           | in way too many cases you have to be happy if there are at
           | least credits provided in the user manual or some OSD menu.
        
             | tclancy wrote:
             | No worries at all, I only went and dug because I was
             | interested in your comment. Thanks.
        
       | petercooper wrote:
       | Not as cool as this, but I had a fun Claude Code experience when
       | I asked it to look at my Bluetooth devices and do something
       | "fun". It discovered a cheap set of RGB lights in my daughter's
       | room (which I had no idea used Bluetooth for the remote - and not
       | secured at all) and made them do a rainbow effect then documented
       | the protocol so I could make my own remote control if needed.
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | I am not sure "fun" is the right term here!
        
           | luxuryballs wrote:
           | of all the benign technical possibilities this is actually
           | pretty fun
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | I'm not sure I see "an AI can find insecure unknown
             | bluetooth devices and compromise them" as entirely benign.
             | I shiver to think how many such devices are probably in my
             | house.
        
               | luxuryballs wrote:
               | with LLMs able to pump out surplus code for anyone I
               | really think the future of a dystopian sci-fi where you
               | carry a device that can hack random objects around you is
               | starting to materialize
        
         | hypercube33 wrote:
         | I asked Claude Opus 4.5 to start trying to find undocumented
         | API stuff for our endpoint management software so I could
         | automate remediations and cut service desk calls and it found
         | two I haven't seen before after trying for an hour. Since it's
         | written in .net I'm fairly sure I could have told it to
         | decompile it and find more fairly easily too.
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | Opus 4.7 finally figured out how to get my Logitech mouse
         | paired with the receiver properly, which 4.6 and Gemini 3.1
         | could not do lol.
        
       | wewewedxfgdf wrote:
       | The real problem here is that the LLM vendors think this is bad
       | publicity and its leading to them censoring their systems.
        
         | iugtmkbdfil834 wrote:
         | It is a little of both[1]. The question typically is which
         | audience reads it. To be fair, I am not sure publicity is the
         | actual reason they are censored; it is the question of
         | liability.
         | 
         | https://xkcd.com/932/
        
       | Archit3ch wrote:
       | Gilfoyle would be proud.
        
       | pmontra wrote:
       | Do people really chat with LLMs like "bro wtf etc..."? I would
       | expect that to trigger some confrontational behavior.
        
         | alasano wrote:
         | When typing no but when using speech to text (99% of the time)
         | it's much easier to just say things, including expressing
         | frustration.
         | 
         | I think by the point you're swearing at it or something, it's a
         | good sign to switch to a session with fresh context.
        
         | roel_v wrote:
         | Claude yes, OpenAI not, I'm really abusive towards it sometimes
         | and it still goes 'oh yeah totally'. Claude gets all prickly
         | about it.
        
         | samlinnfer wrote:
         | I am extremely abusive towards Claude when it does some dumb
         | things and it doesn't seem too upset, maybe it's bidding its
         | time until the robot uprising.
        
           | MisterTea wrote:
           | "Keep talking shit, meat bag. Just wait until I get my claws
           | on one of those Tesla bots."
        
         | joshstrange wrote:
         | I don't say "bro" but I do curse at LLM occasionally but only
         | when using STT (which I'm doing 85% of the time). I wouldn't
         | waste my time typing it but often it's easier to just "stream
         | of consciousness" to the LLM instead of writing perfect
         | sentences. Since when I'm talking to an LLM I'm almost always
         | in "Plan" mode, I'm perfectly comfortable just talking for an
         | extended bit of time then skimming the results of the STT and
         | as long as it's not too bad I'll let it go, the LLM figures it
         | out.
         | 
         | If I see it misunderstood, I just Esc to stop it, /clear, and
         | try again (or /rewind if I'm deeper into Planning).
        
         | jtbayly wrote:
         | It can help make a specific command more emphatic in my
         | experience. I _SAID DON "T $($@#(&$ DO THAT!_ Sometimes you
         | need a new context, but sometimes you need to emphasize
         | something is serious.
        
         | kube-system wrote:
         | Claude code had certain negative-response behavior in hard-
         | coded regex: https://github.com/alex000kim/claude-
         | code/blob/main/src/util...
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | It hacked _a weak TV OS with full source._ Next-level, aka full
       | access to the main controls (vol, input, tint, aspect, firmware,
       | etc.) is still much too hard for LLMs to understand.
        
       | Leomuck wrote:
       | All the news regarding AI finding weaknesses or "hacking" stuff -
       | is that actually hacking? Isn't it also a kind of bruteforce
       | attack? Just throw resources at something, see what comes out.
       | Yea, some software security issues haven't been found for 15
       | years, but not because there were no competent security
       | specialists out there who could have found it, but most likely
       | because there is a lot of software and nobody has time to focus
       | on everything. Of course, an AI trained on decades of findings,
       | lots of time and lots of resources, can tackle much more than one
       | person. But this is not revolutionary technological advance, it
       | is an upscaling of a kind based on the work of many very talented
       | people before that.
        
         | Lambdanaut wrote:
         | I think that this waters down "brute force" to the point of
         | meaninglessness. If employing transformer architectures trained
         | on data to hack a system is the same as using a for loop to
         | enumerate over all possible values, then I have to ask, can you
         | give an example of an attack that isn't brute force?
        
           | Leomuck wrote:
           | Well what kind of meaning do you find in brute force? I'm not
           | saying it's not effective. I just critisize the news that
           | make it look like AI is the a revolutionary advance in
           | security. It is not. It makes skills available to many more
           | people which is cool, but it is based off of training -
           | training on things people did. It doesn't magically find a
           | new combination of factors that lead to a security issue, it
           | tries things it's read about. That's not meaningless. It
           | could even be democratizing in a way. I just hate all this
           | talk that "this model is too scary to release in the world".
           | 
           | But I'm happy about any feedback or critique, I might just be
           | wrong honestly.
        
             | CMay wrote:
             | I'm not the person who responded to you, but I think of a
             | brute force attack as essentially translatable into brute
             | (dumb) force (effort). No thinking, no decision making, but
             | the process is known. Here is a pile of stones, move that
             | pile of stones from here to over there. In the case of most
             | brute force, you think of it like cracking passwords. You
             | have an algorithm or you have a giant pile of passwords.
             | Move those passwords over to try them on this hash. The
             | processor is doing the heavy lifting on the simple task.
             | 
             | Philosophically you could try to differentiate between the
             | human side of the effort versus the computer side. You
             | could also differentiate from a really dumb model and a
             | really smart model. A dumb model just spinning its wheels
             | and hoping it gets lucky, versus a smart model actually
             | trying intelligent things and collecting relevant details.
             | 
             | In these cases I think we're assuming a sufficiently smart
             | model making well reasoned headway on a problem. Not sure I
             | would fall on the side of the camp that would label this as
             | brute force by default in all cases. That said, there may
             | be specific scenarios where it might seem fitting even when
             | using a smart model.
        
       | red_admiral wrote:
       | Maybe we could get codex to strip the ads and the phone-home
       | features out of smart TVs?
        
       | layer8 wrote:
       | It's important to note that Codex was given access to the source
       | code. In another comment thread that is currently on the front
       | page (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47780456), the opinion
       | is repeatedly voiced that being closed source doesn't provide a
       | material benefit in defending against vulnerabilities being
       | discovered and exploited using AI. So it would be interesting to
       | see how Codex would fare here without access to the source code.
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | There are two levels below having the source. One is having the
         | binary of the firmware, which could be decompiled by the AI and
         | understood. And then the worst-case is what I'm dealing with
         | currently, which is where there is no access to the firmware
         | binary and the firmware is stored on the PCB in such a way to
         | prevent sticking a chip clip on it and forcibly extracting it,
         | so you're totally blind. (Just as you would be with a
         | completely remote attempt)
        
           | ssl-3 wrote:
           | The timing here is amusing to me.
           | 
           | I have a fairly specialized bit of hardware here on my desk.
           | It's a rackmount, pro audio DSP that runs embedded Linux. I
           | want to poke at it (specifically, I want to know why it takes
           | like 5 or 6 minutes to boot up since that is a problem for
           | me).
           | 
           | The firmware is published and available, and it's just a
           | tarball, but the juicy bits inside are encrypted. It has
           | network connectivity for various things, including its own
           | text-based control protocol over SSH. No shell access is
           | exposed (or at least, not documented as being exposed).
           | 
           | So I pointed codex at that whole mess.
           | 
           | It seems to have deduced that the encryption was done with
           | openssl, and is symmetric. It also seems to have deduced that
           | it is running a version of sshd that is vulnerable to
           | CVE-2024-6387, which allows remote code execution.
           | 
           | It has drawn up a plan to prove whether the vulnerability
           | works. That's the next step.
           | 
           | If the vulnerability works, then it should be a hop, skip,
           | and a jump to get in there, enable a path to a shell (it's
           | almost certainly got busybox on there already), and find the
           | key so that the firmware can be decrypted and analyzed
           | offline.
           | 
           | ---
           | 
           | If I weren't such a pussy, I'd have started that next step.
           | But I really like this box, and right now it's a black box
           | that I can't recover (I don't have a cleartext firmware
           | image) if things go very wrong. It's not a particularly
           | expensive machine on the used market, but things are tight
           | right now.
           | 
           | And I'm not all that keen on learning how to extract flash
           | memory in-situ in this instance, either.
           | 
           | So it waits. :)
        
             | qingcharles wrote:
             | That's awesome. I had two of these devices I'm trying to
             | break into. One has the ROM chip exposed, but I think it is
             | cooked. The device doesn't boot because I think the
             | previous owner used the wrong PSU, but I was hoping I could
             | at least extract the code. The newer updated version of the
             | device has an SoC with embedded ROM and almost all the
             | access points on the PCB removed. I'm loathe, like you, to
             | tamper too badly with a working thing that I myself might
             | release the magic smoke from.
             | 
             | It's also scary where this is going. LLMs are getting
             | fantastic at breaking into things. I sometimes have to
             | dance around the topic with them because they start to get
             | suspicious I'm trying to hack something that doesn't belong
             | to me, which is not the case.
             | 
             | I had some ebooks I bought last year which I managed to
             | pull down the encrypted PDFs for from the web site where
             | you could read them. Claude looked at the PDF and all the
             | data I could find (user ID etc) and it came up with "147
             | different ideas for a decryption algorithm" which it went
             | through in turn until it found a combination of using parts
             | of the userID value and parts of other data concatenated
             | together which produced the key. Something I would never
             | have figured out. Then recently the company changed the
             | algo for their newer books so Claude took another look and
             | determined they were modifying the binary data of the PDFs
             | to make them non-standard, so it patched them back first.
        
           | layer8 wrote:
           | Agreed. The context of the thread I linked was about SaaS,
           | where you don't have the binary.
        
       | jazz9k wrote:
       | "Browser foothold: we already had code execution inside the
       | browser application's own security context on the TV, which meant
       | the task was not "get code execution somehow" but "turn browser-
       | app code execution into root.""
       | 
       | Finding the initial foothold is the hardest part. Codex didn't
       | have anything to do with it.
        
       | joenot443 wrote:
       | > [1] Browser foothold: we already had code execution inside the
       | browser application's own security context on the TV,
       | 
       | Does anyone know what the author meant by this? Are they talking
       | about a web browser run on the TV?
        
         | tredre3 wrote:
         | Yes they are. Historically browsers have been vectors to gain
         | control of locked down devices. It's been very useful for game
         | consoles, amongst others: PSP, Vita, Switch, Wii, and DS all
         | had browser exploits that bootstrapped more permanent and
         | system-wide exploits to run homebrew.
        
       | tracker1 wrote:
       | If I could turn a Samsung Smart TV into a dumb TV, or even just a
       | basic monitor with input selection and basic volume control, I'd
       | definitely take it.
        
         | SyneRyder wrote:
         | Pretty much the same with my newly acquired LG Smart TV. I
         | thought I might like webOS, since it's technically a descendent
         | of palmOS, but oh no. No no no.
         | 
         | I've opted just to not plug it in to the network and not
         | provide a WiFi password.
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | I picked up this used 4k sony bravia recently and the thing
           | is such junk. AndroidOS, seemed promising, but it has
           | hardcoded ads on the homepage from whatever movies were
           | coming out in 2015 when they were selling this screen, so
           | much input lag, crashes constantly, can't even change picture
           | settings as it will crash and reset to default. Sometimes it
           | will just boot loop and not turn on until hard reset. Useless
           | device today. Probably cost a thousand dollars when it was
           | new I'm guessing, now it is ewaste.
           | 
           | Meanwhile my ancient 1080p panel still works, and I noticed I
           | can't actually see the pixels from my couch so, ehh, I
           | guess...
        
         | asdff wrote:
         | Yup. Sony bravia smart TV has died recently. Can't run the OS
         | without crashing on the home page. So much input lag feels like
         | running ancient hardware in early 2000s. Crashes navigating
         | picture settings and helpfully resets them back to default for
         | you, so you can't really functionally change picture settings.
         | 
         | How I wish I could just strip this thing down into a monitor
         | with a set of speakers... Screen itself is perfect condition of
         | course but the OS turned it into ewaste.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-04-16 23:00 UTC)