3 ms·

Does it produce runnable binaries? The repo does not make it clear, but Apple ships Linux builds of Rosetta 2 that can be used inside Linux VMs on apple silico

by Retr0id 8mo ago

Does it produce runnable binaries? The repo does not make it clear, but Apple ships Linux builds of Rosetta 2 that can be used inside Linux VMs on apple silicon hardware [0]. With some patches (or so I'm told) it can be made to run on non-apple-silicon arm64 hardware. Even if it's not fully decompiled yet, it should be possible to relink the decompiled subsections into an original binary. [0]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization/running-intel-binaries-in-linux-vms-with-rosetta https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization/run...

inoki 8mo ago
WIP ;) The final target might be to get Intel's Houdini-like binary (but for Intel instructions)
Retr0id 8mo ago
re: patches, looks like they've reversed some of the relevant bits: https://github.com/Inokinoki/attesor/commit/233cb459b9db8345debf9861c468bc4ab10c1c31 https://github.com/Inokinoki/attesor/commit/233cb459b9db8345... (I was concerned this might be slop but that detail is promising!)
- duskwuff 8mo ago
  That looks more like the AI inventing code to explain observed behavior (cf. "For Linux virtualization environments, we simulate this...").
  - inoki 8mo ago
    Yeah, I guess it's losing some contexts. Still need human work if want to make it really work on Linux...
  - Retr0id 8mo ago
    Looking closer it does look pretty nonsensical, ugh.
duskwuff 8mo ago
> Does it produce runnable binaries? No. Even the decompiled version is incomplete - there's comments all over it which signal missing code like "could not recover jumptable ... too many branches". The "refactored" version is wildly speculative - it looks more like a very clumsy attempt to write a new translator than to reverse-engineer an existing one. > With some patches (or so I'm told) it can be made to run on non-apple-silicon arm64 hardware. With the huge caveat that the generated code will expect TSO to be enabled, and may malfunction on non-TSO ARM systems, particularly when running multithreaded code. (Most ARM systems are non-TSO; Apple Silicon has a MSR to enable TSO.)

by Retr0id 8mo ago

inoki 8mo ago

WIP ;) The final target might be to get Intel's Houdini-like binary (but for Intel instructions)

Retr0id 8mo ago

re: patches, looks like they've reversed some of the relevant bits: https://github.com/Inokinoki/attesor/commit/233cb459b9db8345debf9861c468bc4ab10c1c31 https://github.com/Inokinoki/attesor/commit/233cb459b9db8345... (I was concerned this might be slop but that detail is promising!)

duskwuff 8mo ago
That looks more like the AI inventing code to explain observed behavior (cf. "For Linux virtualization environments, we simulate this...").
- inoki 8mo ago
  Yeah, I guess it's losing some contexts. Still need human work if want to make it really work on Linux...
- Retr0id 8mo ago
  Looking closer it does look pretty nonsensical, ugh.

duskwuff 8mo ago

> Does it produce runnable binaries? No. Even the decompiled version is incomplete - there's comments all over it which signal missing code like "could not recover jumptable ... too many branches". The "refactored" version is wildly speculative - it looks more like a very clumsy attempt to write a new translator than to reverse-engineer an existing one. > With some patches (or so I'm told) it can be made to run on non-apple-silicon arm64 hardware. With the huge caveat that the generated code will expect TSO to be enabled, and may malfunction on non-TSO ARM systems, particularly when running multithreaded code. (Most ARM systems are non-TSO; Apple Silicon has a MSR to enable TSO.)