Malimite is a free and open-source decompiler designed specifically for iOS and macOS applications. It aims to reconstruct the original Objective-C code from compiled Mach-O binaries, assisting in security research, software analysis, and understanding the inner workings of closed-source apps. Built using Swift, Malimite leverages a custom intermediate representation and features a modular architecture for easy extensibility and improvement. The project is actively under development and welcomes contributions from the community.
The post details the reverse engineering process of Call of Duty's anti-cheat driver, specifically version 1.4.2025. The author uses a kernel debugger and various tools to analyze the driver's initialization, communication with the game, and anti-debugging techniques. They uncover how the driver hides itself from process lists, intercepts system calls related to process and thread creation, and likely monitors game memory for cheats. The analysis includes details on specific function calls, data structures, and control flow within the driver, illustrating how it integrates deeply with the operating system kernel to achieve its anti-cheat goals. The author's primary motivation was educational, focusing on the technical aspects of the reverse engineering process itself.
Hacker News users discuss the reverse engineering of Call of Duty's anti-cheat system, Tactical Advantage Client (TAC). Several express admiration for the technical skill involved in the analysis, particularly the unpacking and decryption process. Some question the legality and ethics of reverse engineering anti-cheat software, while others argue it's crucial for understanding its potential privacy implications. There's skepticism about the efficacy of kernel-level anti-cheat and its potential security vulnerabilities. A few users speculate about potential legal ramifications for the researcher and debate the responsibility of anti-cheat developers to be transparent about their software's behavior. Finally, some commenters share anecdotal experiences with TAC and its impact on game performance.
The post details the process of reverse engineering the Bambu Lab printer's communication protocol used by the Bambu Handy and Bambu Studio software. Through network analysis and packet inspection, the author documented the message structures, including those for camera feeds, printer commands, and real-time status updates. This allowed for the creation of a proof-of-concept Python script capable of basic printer control, demonstrating the feasibility of developing independent software to interact with Bambu Lab printers. The documentation provided includes message format specifications, network endpoints, and example Python code snippets.
Hacker News commenters discuss the reverse engineering of the Bambu Handywork Connect print server software, mostly focusing on the legality and ethics of the endeavor. Some express concern over the potential for misuse and the chilling effect such actions could have on open communication between companies and their customer base. Others argue that reverse engineering is a legitimate activity, particularly for interoperability or when vendors are unresponsive to feature requests. A few commenters mention the common practice of similar reverse engineering efforts, pointing out that many devices rely on undocumented protocols. The discussion also touches on the technical aspects of the reverse engineering process, with some noting the use of Wireshark and Frida. Several users express interest in using the findings to integrate Bambu printers with other software, highlighting a desire for greater control and flexibility.
Summary of Comments ( 5 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42829402
HN commenters generally express interest in Malimite's capabilities, particularly its potential for reverse engineering Swift and SwiftUI. Some highlight the difficulty of decompiling Swift and applaud any progress in this area. Others question its effectiveness compared to existing tools like Hopper, mentioning limitations in reconstructing complex control flow and higher-level language constructs. A few raise ethical concerns about the potential for misuse in piracy and intellectual property theft, while others emphasize the importance of such tools for security research and understanding closed-source software. The developer's choice to keep the tool closed-source is also a point of discussion, with some arguing for open-sourcing it to foster community development and scrutiny.
The Hacker News post for "Malimite – iOS and macOS Decompiler" has several comments discussing the project, its potential uses, and its limitations.
Several commenters express excitement about the project, seeing it as a valuable tool for reverse engineering and security research. They highlight the difficulty of decompiling Apple platforms due to their closed nature and the obfuscation techniques employed, praising Malimite for potentially making this process easier. Some specifically mention the benefit of being able to analyze closed-source applications for vulnerabilities or understand their inner workings.
A discussion arises around the legality and ethical implications of decompilation. Some users point out the potential for misuse, such as cracking software or stealing intellectual property. Others argue that decompilation is a crucial tool for security research and that responsible use is key. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is mentioned in this context, with users debating its applicability to decompilation.
There's significant technical discussion about the decompilation process itself. Commenters discuss the challenges of accurately reconstructing source code from compiled binaries, particularly in the face of optimizations and obfuscation. The use of intermediate representations (IR) is discussed, with some speculating on Malimite's specific approach. The complexity of Objective-C and Swift, and the implications for decompilation, are also touched upon.
Several commenters compare Malimite to existing decompilation tools like Hopper, IDA Pro, and Ghidra. They discuss the relative strengths and weaknesses of each tool, considering factors such as accuracy, ease of use, and platform support. Some express hope that Malimite might offer advantages in decompiling Swift code, which has traditionally been difficult.
Some users request more information about the project, such as its licensing model and future development plans. Others offer suggestions for improvements, such as integrating with existing debugging tools or supporting additional architectures.
Finally, a few commenters express skepticism about the project's claims, questioning its capabilities or suggesting it might be vaporware. They call for more concrete demonstrations of its functionality before drawing firm conclusions.