How To Hack A Binary File On Mac

Active5 months ago

Apple mac bios efi scbo binary file unlock hack crack. Cart and enter your Mac Serial Number. Unlock SCBO file pre loaded on usb within 1 to 3 working days via. IFile / Filza / iFunBox / iTools or any other file managers for iOS. - Cydia Substrate (from Cydia). - PreferenceLoader (from Cydia). Hack Features: - Radar Hack - Unlimited Ammo - No Spread - Night Vision Enabled - No FlashBang - No MedKit CoolDown.

How To Hack A Binary File On Macbook

How to hack a binary file on mac terminal

When I login using SSH, all I can see is this...

I couldn't do anything in here. Commands such as halt, poweroff, reboot will return command not found.

How can I fix this? I am using Debian Squeeze Linux

Der Hochstapler

69.9k51 gold badges239 silver badges290 bronze badges

superusersuperuser

2,5624 gold badges19 silver badges31 bronze badges

7 Answers

How To Hack A Binary File On Mac Terminal

Usually that error message means Linux doesn't recognize the file as a shell script or as an executable file.

Typically the cause is running an executable on the wrong architecture - if you try to run x86 executables on an ARM CPU, this message comes up.

Did /usr/bin/id get overwritten, possibly?

LawrenceCLawrenceC

61.5k12 gold badges109 silver badges186 bronze badges

Try to run it using ./executablefilename instead of using sh executablefilename. It's not a shell script after all.

RidDeBakTiYarRidDeBakTiYar

3312 gold badges3 silver badges10 bronze badges

The problem is running a binary for a different processor architecture.You can use objdump (from binutils) to check architecture of binaries.You can use uname to check architecture of a machine.

e.g. I encountered this error 'cannot execute binary file' when installing FF.Communicator - a firefox plugin for chrome (so I can run pages that use java applets).

objdump shows the binary is 64-bit elf64-x86-64
uname shows my machine is 32-bit i686
$ ./FF.Communicator bash: ./FF.Communicator: cannot execute binary file$ uname -mpioi686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux$ objdump -a ./FF.Communicator ./FF.Communicator: file format elf64-x86-64./FF.Communicator
objdump on a working binary on my machine shows it is 32-bit elf32-i386
$ objdump -a /bin/ls/bin/ls: file format elf32-i386

Using these tools you can check architectures of machines and binaries - not just intel architectures but any processor.

For Mac OSX users, you can find out the architecture info of a specific file using the 'file' command:

gaoithegaoithe

I'm making some wild guesses here, but it looks like the following is happening:

You log in over SSH, triggering bash to run your ~/.profile or ~/.bashrc to set up your environment for you (this is normal).
At some point it tries to execute /bin/id to get your uid, which fails, causing integer expression error, and terminating the script before it can set up your $PATH.
Because your $PATH is not set, bash is only able to run commands with the full path specified.

Use export PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin to fix the $PATH issue until you can fix the root cause of /bin/id failing.

Darth AndroidDarth Android

34.6k4 gold badges78 silver badges101 bronze badges

binary file consists of machine instructions the processor can understand.Your operating system does not mean the same executable will run.move back and forth between the processor instruction set compatible with will usually work well,if they are not compatible CPU will not be able to understand instructions.

acoh Fachaacoh Facha

This means that you are trying to execute a binary file using your bash script which is not intended to be run as you trying it to be. It is already a binary file and you are trying your $SHELL to parse and run it.

in a very simple example, if you try to run `w' command like

similarly you might be hitting the same method or as it looks from your code snippet.

While , for the remaining for your commands, Al these halt, shutdown , reboot etc commands are the root owned commands and need super-user prilveges to run and perform the required operation. normal users can't run them another explanation is that these commands are placed at /sbin/ and /usr/sbin , which might not be in your $PATH variable ( which is used to validate commands in your custody )

Nasir Mahmood Nasir Mahmood

You are running wrong version of the installer, for example, 64bit machine and trying to install 32bit version of the installer.

kwaikwai

protected by Community♦Mar 30 at 13:32

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged linuxbashsshdebian or ask your own question.

Apple Mac Computers are considered to be much safer than Windows computers at keeping out the viruses and malware, but the new Exploit discovered by researchers again proves it indeed quite false.

Last year, The Hacker News reported a deadly simple exploit that completely bypassed one of the core security features in Mac OS X known as Gatekeeper.

Apple released a patch in November, but now the same security researcher who discovered the original Gatekeeper bypass vulnerability said he found an equally obvious workaround.

Patrick Wardle, ex-NSA staffer and head of research at security intelligence firm Synack, said the security patch released by Apple was 'incredibly weak' and that the update was 'easy to bypass' in minutes.

Gatekeeper's Failure Once Again

Introduced in July of 2012, Gatekeeper is Apple's anti-malware feature designed to block untrusted, dodgy apps from running, keeping Mac OS X systems safe from malware.

However, the reality is slightly different, according to Wardle. Hackers can install malicious software on Mac computers, even when Gatekeeper is set to its most restrictive setting.

'Even on a fully-patched OS X 10.11.2 system, Gatekeeper is trivial to bypass,' Wardle wrote in a blog post. 'So hackers can (re)start their trojan distributions while nation states can get back to MitM’ing HTTP downloads from the internet.'

In September, Wardle realized that before allowing any apps to execute on an OS X machine, Gatekeeper performs a number of checks, such as:

Checking the initial digital certificate of a downloaded app
Ensuring the app has been signed with an Apple-recognized developer certificate
Ensuring the app has been originated from the official App Store

But, what Gatekeeper fails to check is – whether the app already trusted by OS X runs or loads other files from the same folder.

However, in the name of a security patch, all Apple did was simply blacklist the signed apps Wardle was abusing to bypass Gatekeeper, rather than fixing the underlying problem.

How to Bypass Gatekeeper in OS X?

This was not effective in preventing attacks. Wardle found a new Apple-signed file that allow him to do the same. Notably, the file was offered by the popular anti-virus firm Kaspersky Labs.

All Wardle has done is:

Identified an already-signed binary file (Binary A) that runs a separate app (Binary B) located in the same folder
Renamed Binary A
Swapped out the legitimate Binary B with a malicious one
Then bundled malicious file in the same folder under the same file name, Binary B

Now, Binary B needs no digital certificate or Apple developer certificate to run, so it can be used to install anything the attacker wants, completely bypassing Gatekeeper.

Wardle notified Apple about his latest finding, and the company rolled out an update blocking the new files Wardle privately reported it, which is not a right approach. Apple should come up with a more comprehensive fix to address the issue.

How to Protect Yourself?

In the meantime, Wardle suggested Mac users to only download software from the Mac App Store and be more careful while downloading apps from the internet.

Wardle will be presenting his findings at the Shmoocon conference in Washington D.C this weekend. He also released a complementary tool for Gatekeeper on Friday, a free tool dubbed Ostiarius, that checks all file executions and blocks untrusted, unsigned code originating from the Web.

Alternatively, otherwise, it might be time to fire Gatekeeper, and hire a new one.

Have something to say about this article? Comment below or share it with us on Facebook, Twitter or our LinkedIn Group.