|
|
| Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kosmiq
Posts: 2304
Location: Somewhere
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005 17:28 Post subject: Re: Emulate Tages |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
| Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005 22:32 Post subject: Re: Emulate Tages |
|
|
| kosmiq wrote: | | Also remember that much from Tages was stolen and implented into Starforce |
nonsense.
kind regards alex // cyberware, ucf, ex-sf.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005 22:46 Post subject: Re: Emulate Tages |
|
|
| sage386 wrote: | | kosmiq wrote: | | Also remember that much from Tages was stolen and implented into Starforce |
nonsense. |
go check your own code mr starforce
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 00:39 Post subject: |
|
|
@Selt
everything's home made, no need to check 
But if you're so smart and know both systems inside-out, i'm really curious about WHAT exactly was 'stolen' (muahaha, rolf) from tages?
Without a proof those claims are nothinig more than pathetic attempts to play down the role of sf devs.
Well, you might continue to think so, probably this way you gotta feel more comfortable. However, this wont change facts.
kosmiq has posted nonsense, i've replied accordingly because i got reliable information and wanted to make it clear.
However, irony in ur words makes me think you're after speculations afterall.
so long.
kind regards alex // cyberware, ucf, ex-sf.
Last edited by sage386 on Sat, 16th Jul 2005 01:06; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 01:04 Post subject: |
|
|
ooh i might be not so smart, but u can bet i feel more than comfortable. relax, get a sleep, u guys will need to be at your best. u'll have a lot of work to do.
i'm talking nonsense, or maybe i'm just ironic? who knows.
suprise surprise
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 01:16 Post subject: |
|
|
shhhtt.
3am here. Ironic? damn you're right, i need Sleep( 60 * 1000 * 60 * 8 );
later!
kind regards alex // cyberware, ucf, ex-sf.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheDuck
Posts: 148
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 01:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Tages is about missing data, drivers loaded in the init stage provide missing data (from twin sectored hidden storage) and game runs correctly, sometimes tages call rewrites some data in the memory, like demo settings into retail settings and so on, hence with illegal copy user will get demo version, or trigger some nasty stuff etc.
All groups, Flt (XIII), Dev (XIII update), Ims (Beyond Good and Evil), Rld (Asterix & Obilix XXL) emulated the calls by dumping the data with original cd's and making an emulator (injecting a piece of code) and forcing the game to call it / get data instead of using the drivers.
@sage386: Isnt new SF feature illegal? Imho when user chooses to disable some drive game shouldnt activate it just like that. Also changing the code of the Miscrosoft OS (drivers, ntoskrnl and so on) is illegal. Other protections use some drivers, but just for better cd/dvd handling not converting system into a slave. Also VM-Ware protection is illegal Some ppl install it / windows os then and wish to play some game... Legal product cannot blacklist any other legal product or change some code in it (unless its debugger heh).
Lets say Im using 2 drives, SCSII (good, working cdrom) and IDE CD-RW (damaged, 50% chance for system crash when I enable that drive), its disabled at the moment, I enable it just to burn some cds from time to time, and I wouldnt risk it now cus im writing important document!
Now lets say I insert some cd to my scsii drive, and run a game/program from it (SF protected) and SF enables the drive, crashes my system, cause data loss. Protection Technologies can be sued right away with no chance to win. Good work - legal users suffer and "bad" crackers skip it with few bytes... 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kosmiq
Posts: 2304
Location: Somewhere
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 05:28 Post subject: |
|
|
Actually the creators of Tages posted on their homepage a small article accusing Starforce team of using some of their "inventions".
Only gotta find that small newspost again. When I do I'll post it here.
@sage386
maybe YOU should take a look at FACTS before posting...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 09:45 Post subject: |
|
|
| TheDuck wrote: |
@sage386: Isnt new SF feature illegal? Imho when user chooses to disable some drive game shouldnt activate it just like that. Also changing the code of the Miscrosoft OS (drivers, ntoskrnl and so on) is illegal. Other protections use some drivers, but just for better cd/dvd handling not converting system into a slave. Also VM-Ware protection is illegal Some ppl install it / windows os then and wish to play some game... Legal product cannot blacklist any other legal product or change some code in it (unless its debugger heh).
Lets say Im using 2 drives, SCSII (good, working cdrom) and IDE CD-RW (damaged, 50% chance for system crash when I enable that drive), its disabled at the moment, I enable it just to burn some cds from time to time, and I wouldnt risk it now cus im writing important document!
Now lets say I insert some cd to my scsii drive, and run a game/program from it (SF protected) and SF enables the drive, crashes my system, cause data loss. Protection Technologies can be sued right away with no chance to win. Good work - legal users suffer and "bad" crackers skip it with few bytes... |
1st: sf didnt stole code parts of Tages as thats useless for a protection based on twin or more backup sets of Sectors on a special created CD. Sf is based on time it takes reading the data not such stufff Tages uses.
2nd: Tages isnt easier to crack then sf3  as you have to play alot of the game to get all data you need for emulation code of twinsectors
3rd: your damn right Duck: actually sf3 new drivers (cycling manager 2006) disable Safe 'n' Sec to work (their own product) and as its not cracked version its bought.
4th: Your damn right again actually a cracker patches the driver and whoops where it is but the enduser is fucked from behind
5th: French government already startet a process against a company called MC2 using sf3 DPM protection. For DVDs they forbid this kind of protection after 1 year process already and now since 3 months they work against cd-rom dvd-rom protections using dpm mode. I got it pasted from a french member of HLM and actually there is not much a chance and when it bypasses france it wil bypass the EU soon too.
6th: according to uk law sf3 driver is illegal and its already reported and researched by lawyers as no program is allowed to enable some hardware when its disabled by the user. So i guess here we have the next rouble waiting for companys using sf3 soon as you can be sure macrovision will start it (press release infos from macrovision)
7th: sf devs should think before code - it makes no sense to fuck the user that buy the game and companies should think too.
f.e. Silent Hunter 3 in the uk ubisoft had "plan a" (sell amount if not cracked) and "plan b" (sell amount after crack). As everyone knows the game got cracked fast for a sf3 game by RLD but they still had more sells as they had placed in "plan a" and scct they had the same and did not reached the amount of "plan b".
SumUp:
The quality shows the sell amount not the protection remove date! - Im not against protection but im against protections that fuck the enduser more then the cracker as the cracker doesnt even play the games they crack and as profen above its the guy that buys whos fucked and the guy that doesnt want to buy either has usb drive or playes a other game instead.
Its not needed to advance a protection so much that you fuck the enduser as much as possible. 3.4.7x is good enough to prevent crackers. Its no need to advance it more and go more and more the illegal way in eu countries. Think about it sage - and remember the past when you cracked yourself!
kindest regards
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
immortal: VISION FACTORY / The Conspiracy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 13:18 Post subject: |
|
|
Sigh, you guys tend to mix things up, and this is the root of speculations.
That was about cd-cops, not tages.
Linkdata has posted so called 'news' on thier servers.
Thier 'news' from Jun 2001, sound really pathetic. especially when you look at the fact that they have overlooked the domain name in the news!
our domain names are "star-force", we have registered "starforce" domains MONTHS after thier news date.
another black PR in thier address in thier own news is a phrase stating that 'he' has reversed thier protection. while they claimed it's 'virtually unbreakable'.
What possible on earth could force ppl to write black PR on themselves?
seems back then, they started to losing thier market positions and were really upset by the fact a much successfull competitor has appeared.
they end up falling into unfair market games, nothing more.
@dr.pat: i'll call that fact, only if that so called 'email' is signed with private corporate sf key and was not written on thier side in notepad. otherwise, this is a bs.
@kosmiq: yes, i know the facts and i prefer not to post rumors.
@Freakshow: maybe, but as cracking gets more sophisticated so does the prot, that's the neverending cycle im afraid.
I know the situation inside-out, and i give you facts to make things clears.
Obviously, its up to you to beleive or not, i wont start arguing.
so long.
kind regards alex // cyberware, ucf, ex-sf.
Last edited by sage386 on Sat, 16th Jul 2005 14:11; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kosmiq
Posts: 2304
Location: Somewhere
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 15:01 Post subject: |
|
|
| sage386 wrote: | Sigh, you guys tend to mix things up, and this is the root of speculations.
That was about cd-cops, not tages.
Linkdata has posted so called 'news' on thier servers.
Thier 'news' from Jun 2001, sound really pathetic. especially when you look at the fact that they have overlooked the domain name in the news!
our domain names are "star-force", we have registered "starforce" domains MONTHS after thier news date.
another black PR in thier address in thier own news is a phrase stating that 'he' has reversed thier protection. while they claimed it's 'virtually unbreakable'.
What possible on earth could force ppl to write black PR on themselves?
seems back then, they started to losing thier market positions and were really upset by the fact a much successfull competitor has appeared.
they end up falling into unfair market games, nothing more.
@dr.pat: i'll call that fact, only if that so called 'email' is signed with private corporate sf key and was not written on thier side in notepad. otherwise, this is a bs.
@kosmiq: yes, i know the facts and i prefer not to post rumors.
@Freakshow: maybe, but as cracking gets more sophisticated so does the prot, that's the neverending cycle im afraid.
I know the situation inside-out, and i give you facts to make things clears.
Obviously, its up to you to beleive or not, i wont start arguing.
so long. |
Nope I do not talk about CD-Cops, I talk about Tages... And still I wouldn't judge the Tages creators to be thieves right away anyawy...
Cracking sure is getting more and more sophisticated, but mind this: Starforce has started with blacklisting which often means they are reachinh the edge of what is possible with the protection. Atleast in its current state. Lets also hope soem countries finds the protection illegal to use or has some illegal instructions contained with it.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 17:13 Post subject: |
|
|
| sage386 wrote: | Tages is completely different copy prot.
It has nothing to do with sf, just like as sf has nothing to do with tages.
They use different validation approaches. Atleast read protection descriptions on official sites.
Besides, tages has appeared YEAR AFTER sf nothing else to say.
Starforce explictly detects running programs that are incompatible with it.
Currently: Debuggers and VMWare (inside the box). SF warns that it cannot run along with these, but not because they are 'bad' programs.
But because SF and these programs attempt to use the same non-shareable system resources and therefore cannot be run simultaneously.
Another reason is known incompatibility or other issues.
If there is no warning window, system probably would just hang up.
SF does not interfere with these programs, instead, SF itself does not run.
Its just like starting two fullscreen directx applications at the same time.
Second one apparently would not run because 1st app has acquired dx surface exclusivelly.
Starforce DOES NOT blacklist any other software in ANY way. |
Sorry but you know your wrong for Debuggers, Daemon Tools, Alcohol and other DPM emulating tools. When 1 is installed SF doesnt run anymore but it worked before with older versions of sf. How do you call this - i call it blacklist or does sf say: "We code our program exactly the way that it uses all resources that other programs use that are able to work against our protection check?"
Questions:
* Why is this added to the driver ( that works ring0 mode not ring3 as it should ) not just to the protect.dll?
* Why is it possible to install a logscript for all i do during a sf dvdrom protection check when i slow down my bus a bit? (e.g. i installed a script from guest login to my pc during i had protection check of sf because of a open ring0 task during the protection check? (SnS solves that but its not a solution ) - its not possible without the protection check runing.
* How can vmware use the same resources as the sf driver - vm ware is old as shit compared to sf3 drivers?
* Why is running debuggers using the same resources when your drivers just check the interupts used by known debuggers and if detected then no run - I call this blacklist against debuggers.
Anyway its a useless discussion as you know the facts and in my eyes blacklisting debuggers, emulators etc. is a legitim way to prevent cracking but when i can install a script during a protection check with guest account real professionals can sure do that too as im much less skilled then profs. Think about the enduser - not all endusers are crackers and they pay the games your comapny protect alex.
I coded my own debugger using complet different startegy to set breakpoints and im no cracker. I guess scene crackers have their own debuggers too. Its useless to protect against si and all the others.
for tages your a bit wrong: tages is a protection that is developed about 5years ago in the actual working mode but im 100% sure sf didnt took 1 idea from them nor did they use partwise same code. In that point i have to defend you and sf . I researched both and they are much far away from each other then imaginable. Their are some segments of code from softshields protect cd 3 and early 5 visible in sf and also some parts of exe protectors coded by russian ucf members in early 386 - p3 times
anyway - i read this on reverse-egeneering.net forum from a developer working for ubisoft:
Starforce 3.5.00.08
*Fixed: USB2-Problems
*Fixed: A hole allowing "Mini-Images" again
*Fixed: Advanced Debugger-Protection
*Improved: Starforce Virtual Machine (tm) v2.7.98
*Added: Reactivate iDE-Channels on startup
*Added: Detection of StarFu**/SFN
*Added: Protection of Protection-Drivers
*Added: The exe isn't completely dumped to Memory now - a full dump is nearly impossible
it was written from sf dev team to ubisoft
what do you call detection of starfuck/sfn, debugger protection? isnt that blacklisting?
good argument i just found a min before i wanted to say 'submit'
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheDuck
Posts: 148
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 17:37 Post subject: |
|
|
Ahaha, funny alex, really. When your ppl code the prot just to make other legit programs useless... it is illegal. You dont need to blacklist VM-ware... SF works under it without any problem... after the check is removed ofcourse which by the way uses VM-ware io which under normal sys raises an exception which is handled right away by SF handler, so dont bs people around about "using same resources", thing is - you dont need "those" resources at all - your target needs them, end of the story.
Oh and about cd-cops, I am sure SF devs stolen cd validation algos from it, say what you want.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 18:06 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 18:26 Post subject: |
|
|
are u still confortable sage?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 18:57 Post subject: |
|
|
i feel more than comfortable, since never been confrontable.
kind regards alex // cyberware, ucf, ex-sf.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Jul 2005 20:43 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 17th Jul 2005 12:15 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sage386
Posts: 30
Location: null pointer
|
| Posted: Sun, 17th Jul 2005 13:06 Post subject: |
|
|
awright )) about blacklisting eh? well
what is a typical blacklist?
1) detect running/installed software by filenames, registry entities, code patterns, and so on.
2) if detected
2a) bug out and refuse to run
2b) interfere with that soft, disable some features of that soft, etc..
3) run normally.
as i previously said, SF does not use this technique except on programs i stated before (2b step never gets used).
debuggers are checked due to non-shareable resources usage, cause we using drx registers (this is the purpose of protection). we have had problems running sf under vmware, not only games protected run slower, but there were real problems tho. as side effecgt, vmware allows users to build 'identical computers' wich means, everything inside the box will be the same. Distributed vmware images with software 'bound' to the computer configuration could compromise security. There are some other issues as well.
any other software is not detected in anyway.
as for that publisher list - it's the easiest way to deliver 'what's new' to the publisher. intead of technically descriebing what we have added, its easier to say, that sfn will no onger work. if there's stated protection/detection of smth, in reality it means we adopted sf to combat the effects of that program.
for example, we added iso protection and other checks, so the DT and similar programs are unable to emulate sf disks properly.
if we were detecting DT as a running program and blacklisted it, you would not be able to utilize well known usb trick.
as you said best evidence is your debugger - go and check.
kind regards alex // cyberware, ucf, ex-sf.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 17th Jul 2005 13:43 Post subject: |
|
|
| sage386 wrote: | awright )) about blacklisting eh? well
what is a typical blacklist?
1) detect running/installed software by filenames, registry entities, code patterns, and so on.
2) if detected
2a) bug out and refuse to run
2b) interfere with that soft, disable some features of that soft, etc..
3) run normally. |
yup exactly but like i said vmware is then blacklisted somehow as you dont want to have it run during a protection check - anyway its disabled already and so no prob at all as i dont wnat to crack sf3 or something else its not a matter for me
| Quote: |
debuggers are checked due to non-shareable resources usage, cause we using drx registers (this is the purpose of protection). we have had problems running sf under vmware, not only games protected run slower, but there were real problems tho. as side effecgt, vmware allows users to build 'identical computers' wich means, everything inside the box will be the same. Distributed vmware images with software 'bound' to the computer configuration could compromise security. There are some other issues as well. |
also no real problem as i guess every guy that wnat to break sf3 for real codees his own debugger anyway to prevent future checks
| Quote: |
as for that publisher list - it's the easiest way to deliver 'what's new' to the publisher. intead of technically descriebing what we have added, its easier to say, that sfn will no onger work. if there's stated protection/detection of smth, in reality it means we adopted sf to combat the effects of that program. |
well i didnt debug sf3 so far as above said i dont want to break it and probably?! im not skilled enough anyway
| Quote: |
for example, we added iso protection and other checks, so the DT and similar programs are unable to emulate sf disks properly.
if we were detecting DT as a running program and blacklisted it, you would not be able to utilize well known usb trick. |
well in ur feature list sf devs sent to game ubisoft usb trick is disabled now anyway and im pretty sure to know how you would do as im sure how i would do it and sf devs are much better skilled then i
| Quote: | | as you said best evidence is your debugger - go and check. |
maybe when my boss let me some time ill check it abit but im not realy so much intrested in sf3 anyway. Most thing that nerves me is that sf enables my ide when i manualy disabled my ide in my hardware system setting because i dont have a ide drive or hdd and when i play 3.5 protected demos i always need my driver dvd or windows cd to search to be able to cancle it and like im said that enable thing is waht nerves and is illegal as you neither disable it after check again nor do you insert my windows or driver cd nor did i allow some ppl to have that right on my pc.
Good luck as i can promisse you when this option isnt soon gone i can promisse you sf has a lot of trouble with endusers and companies soon as its strictly forbidden in the uk, us and most eu countries to touch system settings of endusers without letting them know it and get their agreement.
Like i said before blacklisting is anyway only fucking the enduser but never a cracker and changing system hardwaresettings is fucking the law doggie style - think about it before it comes to trouble with companies. I like strong protections as they make life intresting and dont care about users that dont want to buy a game blaming sf with wrong shit but to be honest its not SOOOO strong against keygen the protection check for a homemade cd.
Think about disable vmware check and touching hardware settings of endusers - its easier to detect if there is a ide dvd/cd is disabled for bypass sf3 check with mounted image then changing hardwaresettings.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 3 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
