Console Hacks - Patient Zero of Piracy and Cheats

[McNum]

Yeah, you know nothing. An insecure system is already broken. It was shipped broken.

Again, for the last time: A patient has born with a terminal illness. A doctor diagnoses it. It is not the fault of the doctor that the patient is ill. The doctor draws attention to it, points it out.

That's what this is. The Switch is insecure. The insecurity is pointed out. The hackers in question did not introduce that insecurity, Nintendo did. It is Nintendo's responsibility to create secure systems. It is no one's responsibility to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that the system is secure. The world doesn't work that way.

Click to shrink...

No. An insecure system is an unlocked door. You're still trespassing if you enter uninvited.

I do expect this to be an incompatible perspective issue. I do not see insecure systems as essentially broken. I see them as easy to break. But you still have to act to break it, and that act is wrong.

 

[RM8]

if youve evidence that piracy contributes to a decline in software sales in a meaningful way, the EU will pay good money for it.

Click to shrink...

They should use that money to travel to a country where piracy is widespread and see for themselves :P

 

[enMTW]

I mean... the PS4 has been hacked for awhile. They've since fixed the issue via software, the bigger issue is that Nintendo fucked up on a hardware level. Even their OWN software can't go in and fix the problem.

Click to shrink...

Sony is not great at security, but Nintendo is comically bad at it. There are numerous unpatchable exploitable vulns in the Switch. The result of designing a piracy prone product without considering security at any point. It should go without saying that you cannot build a console like a commodity tablet; commodity tablets do not face the same types of threats.

 

[tulpa]

Sorry, let me get this straight. Let's say a company has a security vulnerability and they get hacked, and credit cards and identity documents get stolen as a result. If I criticize the company who was hacked for their poor security, that is now a form of victim blaming?

 

[SliceSabre]

I've never had an issue with people hacking console and such, as long as you don't think that gives you the right to go into online games and cheat and ruin everyone else's experience you do you.

What I find gross are the people putting on the veneer of 'preservation' as if this is what it is all about. I hate when people co-op things like that because if as many people care about preservation as threads about emulators and such would lead you to believe, game preservation would be a bigger subject than it is. You say 'preserve' I hear 'pirate'. Hackers aren't doing this because they care about video game preservation, they're doing this because they want to play Breath of the Wild on their PC for free.

 

[Panther2103]

I'm neither here nor there regarding hacking consoles. I had a modchip on my PS2 to play games that were absurdly priced (Rule of Rose, Haunting Ground, Kuon) and to play games from other regions. I can see the downside with people who just want to download and play every single game on a hacked console, but there are also upsides to console hacking (region lock removal, homebrew games, backing up owned games). I don't think I would ever hack a modern console, but I'm perfectly okay with modding older consoles that might have harder to get software, and the companies won't benefit from game sales (as they aren't in retail anymore).

 

[Notaskwid]

They should use that money to travel to a country where piracy is widespread and see for themselves :P

Click to shrink...

There are plenty of people pirating in Europe. I'm from Portugal, most people pirate if they can.

 

[enMTW]

No. An insecure system is an unlocked door. You're still trespassing if you enter uninvited.

I do expect this to be an incompatible perspective issue. I do not see insecure systems as essentially broken. I see them as easy to break. But you still have to act to break it, and that act is wrong.

Click to shrink...

An insecure system is an insecure system. The law does not work the way you are describing - security research is legal. There is no requirement to assist a companies business model by not doing research or by not disclosing your work.

You are in conflict with the entire infosec world as well as common sense. An insecure system is an insecure system. Flaws that make it so are part of the systems nature. There is no difference between that system the day it comes out and the day those flaws are weaponized - it was already broken.

And no, the act isn't wrong. It's how infosec works. It benefits security. It creates security. People deserve to know what threats they face. Nvidia has a chance to patch this flaw in future hardware revisions. This is how it works.

 

[RM8]

There are plenty of people pirating in Europe. I'm from Portugal, most people pirate if they can.

Click to shrink...

Portugal was not part of the research, go figure!

 

[Prophaniti]

I'm literally installing a mod for my original xbox right now. Pretty sure you'll survive.

 

[TripaSeca]

In my country, the DS came with a flashcart where 2gb of SD card could fit dozens of games and was a massive success.
The only example of piracy screwing a System is PSP and that goes to show it is not that easy a correlation.
Homebrew is awesome, jailbreak is awesome. Being able to do things hardware can do and is just locked out of because of corporate interests is each and everyone's right.

 

[McNum]

Sorry, let me get this straight. Let's say a company has a security vulnerability and they get hacked, and credit cards and identity documents get stolen as a result. If I criticize the company who was hacked for their poor security, that is now a form of victim blaming?

Click to shrink...

No. If you're the hacker who does the hack, and you blame the company, then you're on shaky ground, though. Encouraging good security is a good thing. Exploiting bad security is a bad thing.

Having bad security is more incompetence than maliciousness. But incompetence is not an excuse to attack someone.

 

[Chairmanchuck (另一个我)]

They should use that money to travel to a country where piracy is widespread and see for themselves :P

Click to shrink...

Maybe that is because a game costs an equivalent for 500€ for a german e.g. in those countries. See Chile, where a game might be 1/5th of the average monthly salary in its capital...

 

[enMTW]

No. If you're the hacker who does the hack, and you blame the company, then you're on shaky ground, though. Encouraging good security is a good thing. Exploiting bad security is a bad thing.

Having bad security is more incompetence than maliciousness. But incompetence is not an excuse to attack someone.

Click to shrink...

Without bad security being brought into the light, there is no good security. You are telling doctors to keep a diagnosis hidden from the patient. Your views are so ridiculous that they don't deserve a platform.

 

[Glio]

The DS came with a flashcart where 2gb of SD card could fir dozens of games and was a massive success.
The only example of piracy screwing a System is PSP and that goes to show it is not that easy a correlation.
Homebrew is awesome, jailbreak is awesome. Being able to do things hardware can do and is just locked out of because of corporate interests is each and everyone's right.

Click to shrink...

I would dare to say that DS was affected at the end of his life in software in sales by piracy.

 

[TheOMan]

Not really sure you're laying blame at the right place OP. I would think that the ones that choose to cheat are the ones that should shoulder the blame, no?

 

[Arkanius]

I would dare to say that DS was affected at the end of his life in software in sales by piracy.

Click to shrink...

Flashcards offered a better product "1 card -> many games" than having the legit game.
Like Gabe Newell says, whenever Pirates have a better product than you, they win.

 

[Deleted member 4359]

No. An insecure system is an unlocked door. You're still trespassing if you enter uninvited.

I do expect this to be an incompatible perspective issue. I do not see insecure systems as essentially broken. I see them as easy to break. But you still have to act to break it, and that act is wrong.

Click to shrink...

Sega vs Accolade, it's the manufacturers fuck up if they leave holes like this in the system legally.

 

[Hecht]

This thread will still be moderated based on the forum's rules. You can talk about the concept of piracy and its effects and the like, but advocating for piracy, admitting to piracy, equating emulation to piracy, or posting links to pirated material will still be actioned accordingly.

 

[RM8]

Flashcards offered a better product "1 card -> many games" than having the legit game.
Like Gabe Newell says, whenever Pirates have a better product than you, they win.

Click to shrink...

I personally know a lot of people who bought DS games, then stopped after getting a flashcard. But Europe says I'm actually wrong, so there's that, lol.

 

[Regiruler]

Yeah, you know nothing. An insecure system is already broken. It was shipped broken.

Again, for the last time: A patient is born with a terminal illness. A doctor diagnoses it. It is not the fault of the doctor that the patient is ill. The doctor draws attention to it, points it out.

That's what this is. The Switch is insecure. The insecurity is pointed out. The hackers in question did not introduce that insecurity, Nintendo did. It is Nintendo's responsibility to create secure systems. It is no one's responsibility to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that the system is secure. The world doesn't work that way.

Click to shrink...

Using a doctor as a stand-in for hackers is an absurd metaphor. One has the patient's interest in mind, the other has their own. But it's also poor in the other regard, because in reality it's not a patient's fault if they have such an illness.

 

[McNum]

An insecure system is an insecure system. The law does not work the way you are describing - security research is legal. There is no requirement to assist a companies business model by not doing research or by not disclosing your work.

You are in conflict with the entire infosec world as well as common sense. An insecure system is an insecure system. Flaws that make it so are part of the systems nature. There is no difference between that system the day it comes out and the day those flaws are weaponized - it was already broken.

And no, the act isn't wrong. It's how infosec works. It benefits security. It creates security. People deserve to know what threats they face. Nvidia has a chance to patch this flaw in future hardware revisions. This is how it works.

Click to shrink...

But then why release it to the public?

I mean, in essence, I agree that you can do whatever with a piece of hardware. But if you release an exploit to the public, you have to take responsibility for what that exploit is used for. Good or bad. And this thread is meant to remind people that bad exists. Exploits are not all sunshine and rainbows. There is a significant dark side to it, one that can affect people negatively, both in the companies responsible for the original hardware and for the end users who never wanted anything to do with the hacks.

If a hack can guarantee that it cannot be used for piracy and cannot be used to cheat online, I would be okay with it. But they can't. Once the system is open, it's open to all. No matter if their hat is white, black, or has a jolly roger on it.

 

[tulpa]

No. If you're the hacker who does the hack, and you blame the company, then you're on shaky ground, though. Encouraging good security is a good thing. Exploiting bad security is a bad thing.

Having bad security is more incompetence than maliciousness. But incompetence is not an excuse to attack someone.

Click to shrink...

But by your logic, it doesn't matter whether someone was doing the "assault" (hack) or not. Victim blaming is rarely done by the assaulter, but by the bystander without a stake in the situation, who claims the assaulted was responsible for their own assault because of their clothes, mannerisms, etc. It's just an incredibly loaded and misguided term to use in this context.

 

[Kthulhu]

Nah. I wouldn't be able to RIP GameCube games to play on my PC if it wasn't for Wii hacks and Homebrew.

Consumers should be able to hack stuff they own if they want to. Obviously piracy isn't okay, but pirates are gonna pirate stuff no matter what.

I stopped jailbreaking iPhones when apple offered me the features I wanted that I could only get before thru hacks.

Maybe in about 10 years Nintendo will figure that approach out.

Click to shrink...

This too.

 

[enMTW]

Using a doctor as a stand-in for hackers is an absurd metaphor. One has the patient's interest in mind, the other has their own. But it's also poor in the other regard, because in reality it's not a patient's fault if they have such an illness.

Click to shrink...

Security researchers by and large have the interest of security in mind. Their own interests are the same as a competent vendor; security. The vulnerability in question was discovered by a litany of people, some of whom were malicious (Team-Xecuter). Ethical parties discovered it, disclosed it to Nvidia and released it publicly. That act aids security - flaws get fixed, bad acts on the part of vendors have consequences, monetizing piracy gets harder.

I didn't want to address that this issue is Nintendo's fault in the metaphor. I felt that doing so would not aid making the medicine go down, so to speak.

 

[Kung Fu Disco Chicken]

But then why release it to the public?

I mean, in essence, I agree that you can do whatever with a piece of hardware. But if you release an exploit to the public, you have to take responsibility for what that exploit is used for. Good or bad. And this thread is meant to remind people that bad exists. Exploits are not all sunshine and rainbows. There is a significant dark side to it, one that can affect people negatively, both in the companies responsible for the original hardware and for the end users who never wanted anything to do with the hacks.

If a hack can guarantee that it cannot be used for piracy and cannot be used to cheat online, I would be okay with it. But they can't. Once the system is open, it's open to all. No matter if their hat is white, black, or has a jolly roger on it.

Click to shrink...

Usually how it works in White Hat hacking is that the hacker will privately contact the company first, explain what they've done, then the company ignores it and the hacker will release the information publicly.

 

[enMTW]

But then why release it to the public?

I mean, in essence, I agree that you can do whatever with a piece of hardware. But if you release an exploit to the public, you have to take responsibility for what that exploit is used for. Good or bad. And this thread is meant to remind people that bad exists. Exploits are not all sunshine and rainbows. There is a significant dark side to it, one that can affect people negatively, both in the companies responsible for the original hardware and for the end users who never wanted anything to do with the hacks.

If a hack can guarantee that it cannot be used for piracy and cannot be used to cheat online, I would be okay with it. But they can't. Once the system is open, it's open to all. No matter if their hat is white, black, or has a jolly roger on it.

Click to shrink...

It aids security and serves as an advertisement of one's capabilities. Without consequences for bad security, there would be no real security in consumer products.

You really don't. The vuln was released by Nintendo/Nvidia. Weaponizing that vuln is what happens to vulns. You can either have ethical researchers who disclose the vuln to Nvidia and later release it or you can have Team-Xecuter doing it strictly for cash and warez, your choice.

The fault lies solely with Nintendo. You really don't want a world where actual research (including release, among the most important parts) is prohibited. The result is only bad actors doing the work.

 

[LewieP]

No. An insecure system is an unlocked door. You're still trespassing if you enter uninvited.

I do expect this to be an incompatible perspective issue. I do not see insecure systems as essentially broken. I see them as easy to break. But you still have to act to break it, and that act is wrong.

Click to shrink...

You are not trespassing if the door belongs to you and is on your property.

 

[McNum]

But by your logic, it doesn't matter whether someone was doing the "assault" (hack) or not. Victim blaming is rarely done by the assaulter, but by the bystander without a stake in the situation, who claims the assaulted was responsible for their own assault because of their clothes, mannerisms, etc. It's just an incredibly loaded and misguided term to use in this context.

Click to shrink...

Ah, then sorry. I apologize for my misuse of the term. I'll try to do better next time, but I'll leave it as-is so people can learn from me messing up on that point.

 

[Wamb0wneD]

Yeah, you know nothing. An insecure system is already broken. It was shipped broken.

Again, for the last time: A patient is born with a terminal illness. A doctor diagnoses it. It is not the fault of the doctor that the patient is ill. The doctor draws attention to it, points it out.

That's what this is. The Switch is insecure. The insecurity is pointed out. The hackers in question did not introduce that insecurity, Nintendo did. It is Nintendo's responsibility to create secure systems. It is no one's responsibility to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that the system is secure. The world doesn't work that way.

Click to shrink...

Except a doctor pointing out an illness is doing no harm and has no motive to do anything but to clarify things.
Someone hacking the shit out of a system clearly doesn't give a fuck whether it's used for piracy or not.
Comparing doctors to hackers is quite something lmao.

 

[2+2=5]

Consoles should be hacked around the end of their lifetime, too early can discourage developers, damage sales, multiplayer etc.

 

[tulpa]

Ah, then sorry. I apologize for my misuse of the term. I'll try to do better next time, but I'll leave it as-is so people can learn from me messing up on that point.

Click to shrink...

Fair enough, and good on you.

 

[enMTW]

Usually how it works in White Hat hacking is that the hacker will privately contact the company first, explain what they've done, then the company ignores it and the hacker will release the information publicly.

Click to shrink...

In this case, Nvidia was contacted, a disclosure deadline was set and disclosure was done days prior to the expiration of the deadline, when an unknown third party disclosed the vulnerability publicly. Business as usual in this line of work.

 

[Wamb0wneD]

Consoles should be hacked around the end of their lifetime, too early can discourage developers, damage sales, multiplayer etc.

Click to shrink...

But being able to play BotW even before release for free was because of preservation purposes, don't you know?!

 

[Notaskwid]

Portugal was not part of the research, go figure!

Click to shrink...

Spain was, it has a very similar culture. Poland too.

Not necessarily about games, but I assume it also includes them:

In Russia, the level of pirated software use in 2011 was 63 percent, 2 percent lower than in 2010. Sales of licensed software in 2011has increased 10 percent. The commercial value of pirated software installed on Russian computers last year was US$3.2 billion. Interestingly, 51 percent of Russian software pirates are women, while the ratio worldwide is 40 percent.

The United States, the world's largest software market, reported the lowest piracy rate at just 19 percent, though that still accounted for nearly US$10 billion in illegal activity.

In Poland, the figure is 53 percent, 54 percent in Lithuania, 61 percent in Greece, 63 percent in Romania and 64 percent in Bulgaria. The average figure for the European Union is 33 percent

Click to shrink...

https://www.russia-briefing.com/news/russia-ranks-second-in-pirated-software-users-after-china.html/

 

[enMTW]

Except a doctor pointing out an illness is doing no harm and has no motive to do anything but to clarify things.
Someone hacking the shit out of a system clearly doesn't give a fuck whether it's used for piracy or not.
Comparing doctors to hackers is quite something lmao.

Click to shrink...

What you are saying is simply untrue and has no relation to reality. This is a situation with one malicious actor, who has yet to release anything, and a bunch of legitimate actors who followed generally accepted practices with regards to vendor notification and disclosure deadline.

 

[Platy]

I personally know a lot of people who bought DS games, then stopped after getting a flashcard. But Europe says I'm actually wrong, so there's that, lol.

Click to shrink...

Steam asking acceptable prices for games did more to fight piracy in brazil than any anti homebrew thing

because people DON'T HOMEBREW in brazil =P

 

[Wamb0wneD]

What you are saying is simply untrue and has no relation to reality.

Click to shrink...

What? Mind to elaborate or...

 

[enMTW]

What? Mind to elaborate or...

Click to shrink...

I edited my post to provide more clarity on what I mean.

 

[Inugami]

Except a doctor pointing out an illness is doing no harm and has no motive to do anything but to clarify things.
Someone hacking the shit out of a system clearly doesn't give a fuck whether it's used for piracy or not.
Comparing doctors to hackers is quite something lmao.

Click to shrink...

A white-hat hacker is exactly like a good doctor. Trained for years, has the best interest of everyone at heart, and geniunely wants to help people.

It's not the white hat hacker you're upset at, you're upset at guy who claims to be a doctor and then sells his patients poison for profit.

 

[FrakEarth]

Yeah, you know nothing. An insecure system is already broken. It was shipped broken.

Again, for the last time: A patient is born with a terminal illness. A doctor diagnoses it. It is not the fault of the doctor that the patient is ill. The doctor draws attention to it, points it out.

That's what this is. The Switch is insecure. The insecurity is pointed out. The hackers in question did not introduce that insecurity, Nintendo did. It is Nintendo's responsibility to create secure systems. It is no one's responsibility to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that the system is secure. The world doesn't work that way.

Click to shrink...

I agree that those working to expose security flaws have no responsibility to bury their heads in the sand and pretend flaws do not exist, however, let's not pretend the pursuit of exploits is always noble or that it's not for notoriety.

And in your health analogy - I would say it's more like this: the patient is born with a defective genome that makes it predisposed to risk of certain forms of cancer. The doctor walks in and bombards the patient with gamma rays, alcohol and fast food. The patient develops cancer. Doctor tells the world about his findings. Patient can now backup his brain and play Snes9x.

Nintendo needs a bug bounty / white-hat reward scheme or something if it doesn't have one. All three of the manufacturers do.

The worst part of this hack is that its based in hardware and essentially unfixable. It sounds to me like it was nVidias fault as well. If Nintendo are forced to release a hardware revision, and forced to isolate users of the original console online I wonder how people would feel about the exploit release then?

 

[enMTW]

A white-hat hacker is exactly like a good doctor. Trained for years, has the best interest of everyone at heart, and geniunely wants to help people.

It's not the white hat hacker you're upset at, you're upset at guy who claims to be a doctor and then sells his patients poison for profit.

Click to shrink...

The only party that meets that description is Team-Xecuter, and they haven't sold anything yet.

 

[2112]

Piracy fearmongering on this forum is next level.

 

[enMTW]

I agree that those working to expose security flaws have no responsibility to bury their heads in the sand and pretend flaws do not exist, however, let's not pretend the pursuit of exploits is always noble or that it's not for notoriety.

And in your health analogy - I would say it's more like this: the patient is born with a defective genome that makes it predisposed to risk of certain forms of cancer. The doctor walks in and bombards the patient with gamma rays, alcohol and fast food. The patient develops cancer. Doctor tells the world about his findings. Patient can now backup his brain and play Snes9x.

The worst part of this hack is that its based in hardware and essentially unfixable. It sounds to me like it was nVidias fault as well. If Nintendo are forced to release a hardware revision, and forced to isolate users of the original console online I wonder how people would feel about the exploit release then?

Click to shrink...

I do not consider that to be relevant. Lawful, ethical conduct is always permissible in my book.

That doesn't appear to be a good faith way of looking at things. The patient isn't 'predisposed' to anything, he was born with the problem. The situation is this - the hardware is insecure due to actions by Nintendo and Nvidia. Hackers didn't make the hardware insecure, Nintendo/Nvidia did. By doing so, they will suffer piracy as a result. That is the natural way of things - insecure hardware gets revealed as insecure, other actors will take that insecurity and use it for their own gains. The solution is for the vendor to make secure platforms instead.

That would not be something that would happen and would remain the fault of Nintendo/Nvidia regardless.

-

I'm going to miss the next hour or so of argument, but I'll be back after. Looking forward to explaining what security is over and over again.

 

[tulpa]

But being able to play BotW even before release for free was because of preservation purposes, don't you know?!

Click to shrink...

I don't think anyone disputes that custom software can facilitate piracy. But, just as it's not really an argument to make PC into a closed platform, it shouldn't be viewed, in and of itself, as a reason to prevent law-abiding people from modifying their systems in a way they are perfectly legally entitled to. And, at least in the US, the law is clear. Modifying your devices is perfectly legal.

 

[Wamb0wneD]

I edited my post to provide more clarity on what I mean.

Click to shrink...

Got you. The thing is the legitimate actors don't care about the malicious actor's doings, nor if their findings are used for anything malicious.

A white-hat hacker is exactly like a good doctor. Trained for years, has the best interest of everyone at heart, and geniunely wants to help people.

It's not the white hat hacker you're upset at, you're upset at guy who claims to be a doctor and then sells his patients poison for profit.

Click to shrink...

A white-hat hacker would just report that shit to Nintendo for a profit and leave it be, not sharing it with everyone, people who just want homebrew and people who want to play everything for free alike. People can pretend it's only for the former all they want, they know it's not true. They simply don't care.

I don't think anyone disputes that custom software can facilitate piracy. But, just as it's not really an argument to make PC into a closed platform, it shouldn't be viewed, in and of itself, as a reason to prevent law-abiding people from modifying their systems in a way they are perfectly legally entitled to. And, at least in the US, the law is clear. Modifying your devices is perfectly legal.

Click to shrink...

Never claimed any of the sort.
It's just when people who enable said piracy act like they never intended for that to happen, which is bullshit. They do know what will happen.

 

[Deleted member 32374]

Getting anything and everything to run doom is a sacred tradition.

I've never modded a console, defeats the purpose in my mind.

 

[enMTW]

Got you. The thing is the legitimate actors don't care about the malicious actor's doings, nor if their findings are used for anything malicious.


A white-hat hacker would just report that shit to Nintendo for a profit and leave it be, not sharing it with everyone, people who just want homebrew and people who want to play everything for free alike. People can pretend it's only for the former all they want, they know it's not true. They simply don't care.

Click to shrink...

There is not a mechanism to care. How things work is that insecurity is used by people for their own gains. The insecurity is not the fault of the person who revealed it. The nature of insecurity is that it will be discovered eventually and will be used however one wants. In this case, the insecurity was so blatant that dozens of people had knowledge of it for months. Even ignoring the litany of researchers with knowledge, a piracy modchip company also had knowledge and was preparing a commercial product that took advantage of the vulnerability. There was no option to keep it private, not that researchers have a requirement to do so or even should.

That is not the only mechanism of 'white hat' work. There is no requirement to sell exploits for cash, nor do most actors like those programs. By not revealing insecurity to the world, insecurity flourishes. By introducing a cost, vendors have an incentive to create secure products.

 

[MadJakeChurchill]

(This is called victim blaming, by the way.)

Click to shrink...

Can you not equate this to victims of crime, please?

Consumers should be within their full power to install custom software on hardware that they legally purchased. How can you be so subservient to this corporations that you think this is a harmful thing?

I will add nuance to this, however: it can be used for piracy. And piracy of that nature should be tackled - either by taking away the sites that host that software, or taking action on the pirate.

 

[McNum]

The only party that meets that description is Team-Xecuter, and they haven't sold anything yet.

Click to shrink...

Wait that's a real name? I am.. somehow less surprised than I should be at that.

I will say this thread has been more educational for me than I expected it to. Thanks for, you know, actually explaining things instead of giving up and yelling. I would have understood that, too.

I do still want things to remain un-hacked, but that ship has sailed for the Switch. I do hope nothing bad will come of it for me since I have a launch Switch, but I worry. About broken online that I soon have to pay for. About ridiculously unlikely Pokémon in trade or PvP. Not that I don't want a Shiny Ralts, but I want a legit one. And that can't be guaranteed if save hacks are available and I get one in a Wonder Trade. And about piracy to a level where it becomes untenable to develop for the system, causing software support to wither and die.

Most of that will likely not happen. Some of it may. There is a non-zero chance of it now and that bothers me.