Official GBATemp.net Flash Cart Safety F.A.Q

Yepi69

Jill-sandwiched
Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
2,862
Trophies
2
Age
28
Location
Behind you
XP
1,776
Country
Portugal
Or just don't buy a flashcart at all for the time being, we know the risks, no sense into buying something that can potentially wreck your system beyond warranty with something so new that it wasn't perfected yet.
 

mechagouki

Kill 'em all...
Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
679
Trophies
1
Age
52
Location
Toronto, ON
XP
614
Country
Canada
The FAQ twice mentions a device called an ARUDINO that can be used for unbricking. I can't seem to find this device for sale anywhere on the internet. Would it be possible to modify an ARDUINO to serve the same purpose?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foxi4

Foxi4

Endless Trash
OP
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
The FAQ twice mentions a device called an ARUDINO that can be used for unbricking. I can't seem to find this device for sale anywhere on the internet. Would it be possible to modify an ARDUINO to serve the same purpose?
This is actually a mistake on my part - I always misspell Arduino for some reason. Well-spotted, the name was now corrected in the F.A.Q. ;)
 

Shinitai

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
86
Trophies
0
XP
180
Country
Uruguay
Hey man, thanks for writing this. Just one thing:
however the checksums check responsibile for bricking was said to refer to ARM9 code in memory while the Launcher.dat checksum check merely prevented the exploit from executing - the latter was removed by Normatt in his firmware patch. The existence of this code is yet to be conclusively proven, however it does rise security concerns as systems of numerous users, including our reviewer Devin, have been bricked.
I'm having trouble understanding this.
What I'm getting is that there are two checksum checks. One of them checks the Launcher.dat checksum, and prevents the exploit from executing (and thus the system from entering "Gateway mode") if it fails. The other one checks something else (ARM9 code in memory?) and bricks the system if it fails.
Is that right?
 

Cyan

GBATemp's lurking knight
Former Staff
Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Messages
23,749
Trophies
4
Age
45
Location
Engine room, learning
XP
15,646
Country
France
that's right.
The memory check is an additional check in place "in case Clone teams disable the checksum check to alter the Launcher.dat", added in 2.0b2.
it was meant to brick clone user's console, because Gateway team don't like Clone team stealing their work (Clone team only replace the "Gateway" string to "R4i", patch the file's checkum function, and release it as their own, making money on Gateway's work).

Like they did previously, on 2.0b2 release the Clone team patched the Name's string and the file's checksum, without analyzing the other/newer functions, and released it with the bricking check code activated.
The Gateway team waited quietly for the brick wave which should have been caused by the clones, to tell users that "clones team should not be trusted", but it backfired at them because it was discovered that they purposely included the bricking code and it affected even legit Gateway users.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shinitai and Foxi4

Arras

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Messages
6,317
Trophies
2
XP
5,382
Country
Netherlands
The FAQ twice mentions a device called an ARUDINO that can be used for unbricking. I can't seem to find this device for sale anywhere on the internet. Would it be possible to modify an ARDUINO to serve the same purpose?
Scratching the name and writing ARUDINO on it probably works :P
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foxi4

Foxi4

Endless Trash
OP
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
Hey man, thanks for writing this. Just one thing:

I'm having trouble understanding this.
What I'm getting is that there are two checksum checks. One of them checks the Launcher.dat checksum, and prevents the exploit from executing (and thus the system from entering "Gateway mode") if it fails. The other one checks something else (ARM9 code in memory?) and bricks the system if it fails.
Is that right?
That's correct, see above. I've clarified the sentence so that it's clear that there are in fact two implemented checks. I also added gamesquest1's new unbricking video tutorial. :)
 

irondoom

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
111
Trophies
0
XP
157
Country
United States
I tried to downgrade to 1.2 but for some reasons it did not see my save games (both ocarina zelda and bravely default). I verified that save games were still on the 3DS SD card (and backed up on my PC). They were on the card, but the ROM wanted to make new save files for both games.

I put the gateway version back to 2.0B2 and it sees the save games again. I am not too worried about brick because I have made NAND backups, and did soldering for awhile, and have arduino already from other projects. So its not too big a thing if i hit a brick, but I would still prefer to avoid it.

So I want to use 1.2, but only if I can downgrade from 2.0b2 without losing my saves. I don't see why it would be a problem, but when I downgraded it would not see the saves on the SD card. Just wondering can anyone confirm they did a downgrade and did not lose their saves to these games? Most especially concerned about Bravely Default and Shin Megami IV as I have most amount of hours in those two.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
OP
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
irondoom Unfortunately, 1.2 is not compatible with the 2.0 save format. You may be able to downgrade to the safer 2.0B1 without losing progress, however make sure that you backup all your saves as the firmware is unstable and may corrupt them. That would be the recommended course of action in my opinion, sorry to hear about the inconvenience.
 

Shinitai

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
86
Trophies
0
XP
180
Country
Uruguay
that's right.
The memory check is an additional check in place "in case Clone teams disable the checksum check to alter the Launcher.dat", added in 2.0b2.
it was meant to brick clone user's console, because Gateway team don't like Clone team stealing their work (Clone team only replace the "Gateway" string to "R4i", patch the file's checkum function, and release it as their own, making money on Gateway's work).

Like they did previously, on 2.0b2 release the Clone team patched the Name's string and the file's checksum, without analyzing the other/newer functions, and released it with the bricking check code activated.
The Gateway team waited quietly for the brick wave which should have been caused by the clones, to tell users that "clones team should not be trusted", but it backfired at them because it was discovered that they purposely included the bricking code and it affected even legit Gateway users.
So 2.0b1 already had the Launcher.dat checksum verification and the bricking function, and an additional one was included in 2.0b2? And I'm guessing the second one is buggy, and that's why all legit bricks happened to people using 2.0b2 (except for the one person who reported a brick on 2.0b1)?
If that's the case, do earlier versions like 1.2 have any verification/bricking function at all?


Also, on another note, what the hell with the savegame incompatibilities? Jesus. Why would there ever be more than one savegame format? Breaks my heart.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
OP
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
So 2.0b1 already had the Launcher.dat checksum verification and the bricking function, and an additional one was included in 2.0b2? And I'm guessing the second one is buggy, and that's why all legit bricks happened to people using 2.0b2 (except for the one person who reported a brick on 2.0b1)?
If that's the case, do earlier versions like 1.2 have any verification/bricking function at all?


Also, on another note, what the hell with the savegame incompatibilities? Jesus. Why would there ever be more than one savegame format? Breaks my heart.
2.0B1 and 1.2 are confirmed to be free of the bricking code, the reason why 1.2 is endorsed is its stability. The reasons for a new save file format is a matter of compatibility with newer games, I'd wager.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shinitai

Shinitai

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
86
Trophies
0
XP
180
Country
Uruguay
Right, my bad. 2.0b1 had the verification but instead of bricking the console, the exploit just fails to run if the verification fails. Then a second verification was added in 2.0b2 along with the bricking code. Is that right?

The savegame format thing doesn't make sense to me. As far as I know, the format is actually decided by the game developer and can be whatever the hell they want, so it's usually different for each game. I don't see how Gateway could have a say on it.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
OP
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
Right, my bad. 2.0b1 had the verification but instead of bricking the console, the exploit just fails to run if the verification fails. Then a second verification was added in 2.0b2 along with the bricking code. Is that right?

The savegame format thing doesn't make sense to me. As far as I know, the format is actually decided by the game developer and can be whatever the hell they want, so it's usually different for each game. I don't see how Gateway could have a say on it.
Both checksum checks were added in 2.0B2, 2.0B1 is clean but terribly unstable. Gateway does have a say because the save files are not handled exactly the same as on retail cartridges - they're handled by Gateway's firmware. Substantial changes to the loading mechanism necessitate a change of formats sometimes.
 

J. Sinclair

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
Jan 31, 2014
Messages
58
Trophies
0
Age
35
Location
Tiller, Norway
XP
61
Country
Norway
Both checksum checks were added in 2.0B2, 2.0B1 is clean but terribly unstable. Gateway does have a say because the save files are not handled exactly the same as on retail cartridges - they're handled by Gateway's firmware. Substantial changes to the loading mechanism necessitate a change of formats sometimes.

Right, but I thought that it was not brick code but rather a bug or a problem with the code where if you ran GW Diagnostics and then booted into Gateway mode it would brick the console.
I'm may be wrong in thinking this, but is that a possibility? That it's just a bug, gone rouge?

Also have a quick question about the youtube app and GW.
My system froze when I tried to view a video. It would not let me do anything, so I held the power button down until it died. Then when powering on again, after I selected "Boot GW Mode" it froze on a black screen again. Tried doing it once more but in Classic mode and then it came back. After that it worked to boot in GW mode.
Anyone know what and why this happened?
 

Shinitai

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
86
Trophies
0
XP
180
Country
Uruguay
Both checksum checks were added in 2.0B2, 2.0B1 is clean but terribly unstable. Gateway does have a say because the save files are not handled exactly the same as on retail cartridges - they're handled by Gateway's firmware. Substantial changes to the loading mechanism necessitate a change of formats sometimes.
That's what I thought, but Cyan's post seems to imply that 2.0b1 had a check and a second one was added for 2.0b2.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
OP
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
Right, but I thought that it was not brick code but rather a bug or a problem with the code where if you ran GW Diagnostics and then booted into Gateway mode it would brick the console.
I'm may be wrong in thinking this, but is that a possibility? That it's just a bug, gone rouge?

Also have a quick question about the youtube app and GW.
My system froze when I tried to view a video. It would not let me do anything, so I held the power button down until it died. Then when powering on again, after I selected "Boot GW Mode" it froze on a black screen again. Tried doing it once more but in Classic mode and then it came back. After that it worked to boot in GW mode.
Anyone know what and why this happened?
With the recent developments in mind, I find it unlikely that the bricks resulting from the use of the Diagnostics Tool aren't connected with the brick code. mathieulh's theory about how the bricks are more frequent due to intense use of Gateway-specific functionality by the tool is far more likely. If these bricks were unrelated to the bricking code, they wouldn't be magically fixable by using the same unlocking key generated using the GW master key.

Your 3DS likely closed because the Youtube app is simply buggy. The GW launcher could freeze to a black screen due to a simple glitch or due to some remnants of information in memory which prevented it from passing the ARM checksum test phase - I don't think it's a reason for concern.
That's what I thought, but Cyan's post seems to imply that 2.0b1 had a check and a second one was added for 2.0b2.
I'll let Cyan clarify that, as I'm not sure myself. The first check isn't malicious so it had little bearing to system safety, so I didn't really dig into that subject too deeply. ;) Going by what crediar stated in his original warning, the firmware checksum check was implemented in 2.02B.
 
  • Like
Reactions: J. Sinclair

Foxi4

Endless Trash
OP
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
I am unstickying this thread from the homepage (been days now) to leave room for other news :)
Foxi4
Fair enough - with the Gateway master key out and about, I think everyone's made up their mind about the situation anyways and with unbrickers around, the situation can be considered more or less resolved. ;)
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    I guess Ancientboi would be Peter
    +2
  • SylverReZ @ SylverReZ:
    Loooooool :rofl2:
  • SylverReZ @ SylverReZ:
    So true
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    @K3Nv2 Snow Day is pretty fun. My only bitch would be the camera controls, when you move around, say down, you have to move the right stick left or right to get camera to turn and get your view, other than that I like it so far.
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    From what people say pvp isn't even worth it
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    I just been playing offline, and they give you a few bots here n there on your team to help battle. I don't think it's as funny as the other games tho, more battle oriented than humor, which kinda sucks, but I'm still early in it
  • Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty:
    @BigOnYa, doesnt the game have a campaign mode?
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    Yea, and co-op, but you can also start a pvp session and battle just with friends. You get special skill cards (powers) the more you play. And higher value cards, but you can only enable so many cards at a time.
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    If you can find enough for it
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    Toilet paper is considered the money, you collect and buy stuff with TP, kinda funny. Graphics are def better than the other games tho, I think they used Unity 5 engine.
  • Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo:
    Look if I zoom in enough I can see the herpes!!!
    +1
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    In fact I'm gonna go make a drink, roll a fatty n play some, good night to all!
    +2
  • Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty:
    I bet most people at the time still watched it in black and white
  • SylverReZ @ SylverReZ:
    @Xdqwerty, Many of them did before colour television was common.
  • SylverReZ @ SylverReZ:
    Likely because black and white TV was in-expensive.
    +1
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    It certainly wasn't inexpensive it cost the same as a new car back then
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    How much did a 1965 color TV cost?

    For example, a 21-inch (diagonal) GE color television in 1965 had an advertised price of $499, which is equal to $4,724 in today's dollars, according to the federal government's inflation calculator.
  • Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty:
    @K3Nv2, take into consideration how economy was back then
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Yeah that's why they listed inflation rates
  • Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty:
    Sorry didnt read that part
  • BakerMan @ BakerMan:
    @LeoTCK don't worry i knew he was joking
    +1
    BakerMan @ BakerMan: @LeoTCK don't worry i knew he was joking +1