>>33
Dude, put down the tripcode and take a deep breath. Like I said, this isn't slashdot.
Reverse engineering a modern microprocessor is cheaper than building one from scratch. Second, your understanding of the PSP's security model is clearly lacking. They've got all the bits you suggest in there in the current revisions: a TPM analogue, signed software components all the way up from the BIOS-equivalent (it being a MIPS-based system, so no x86-style BIOS), hardware verification and attestation, you name it. Hell, even the original Xbox had signed software components and hardware verification using an "onion" model, and look at what happened: some MIT dude puts a FPGA-based bus analyzer on top of the cpu-to-northbridge wires and BOOM.
My point is that if you understand at all how many distinct factors go into making a system secure (well, actually, "more secure than the one before that", being as security isn't like being pregnant), the tradeoffs become readily apparent. Certainly Sony could rewrite all code that goes into the PSP in Haskell or some such verifiable language in which stack smashing or integer overflows didn't happen or were caught in hardware, but then you'd have issues with algorithm level bugs and the way verification-oriented languages tend to result in code that isn't appropriate for systems that have use for that 60% of cycles that the runtime tends to slurp up for its own use. Like, uhh, a handheld game console for instance.
It's like putting a lock on the front door. Either the burglar will break the lock using omg-hueg cutting tools, fucks with the hinges, comes in through the window or back door or (best of all) manipulates the mechanism of the lock so that the lock opens as if by key. Likewise, if you use signed executables, the attacker will simply attack the signed executables' behaviour in order to run his stuff inside the privileged zone. The complexity of software in these so-called secure systems will keep increasing at a rate that I believe cannot be matched by the rate of closing shit up. (Indeed, some would argue that the act of closing shit up tends to kill creativity and restrict improvement to the evolutionary, thus leaving the game console manufacturer's flank wide open to an innovative competitor.)
In a nutshell, I think human ingenuity is going to keep on winning as it has from the dawn of recorded culture. After all, the hackers outnumber the greyfaces.