Hacking Nintendo Switch Warez (& others) on GBAtemp

[Goloki]

Uh? The SX OS can be downloaded for free. There's no copyright on it. I say let the cracked version be freely distributed here!

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Uh? The SX OS can be downloaded for free. There's no copyright on it. I say let the cracked version be freely distributed here!

No, there's speculation that it contains code from Atmosphere, which would make it a violation of Atmosphere's copyright. No one knows, though, obviously

 

[Subtle Demise]

These are sometimes found in CFW downloads. An example is a folder titled 0100000000000033 containing a file called "main" of around 300-420kb (the Nintendo ES binary), and any file called FS_something.kip1 that is over a megabyte. If more common ones crop up, they shall be added to this thread.

If that's how copyright actually works, it really shouldn't. You shouldn't be allowed to issue takedown notices for a teeny tiny piece of a much larger file. It should be covered under fair use in the same way that book snippets and movie clips in reviews are or how sound samples are fair game in music. It's providing interoperability with other programs. If you deconstructed the file into raw binary form, you'd find portions of it in many digital files due to its small size.

By this logic, all texture and model hacks are illegal, because they are modifications of copyrighted asset files. Rom hacks and total conversions as well. Even if all those things are distributed as patches, those patches still contain portions of modified game logic and graphics data. They are unauthorized derivative works. Why are those given a pass and we haven't shut down filetrip yet? "Because this file only exists for piracy!" You might say. My answer to that is future rom hacks. When you make changes to game files, the signature is no longer valid, correct? Precisely why signature check removal has a legitimate use.

Note this isn't a rant against you, the site, or its policies, rather against Nintendo and other companies who think they own every byte of every digital file ever created.

 

[Drakia]

Because IPS is a very poor choice of format -- it more or less has a 16 megabyte size limit, can not handle data relocation, can not handle encryption/compression in a useful way, does not check the source file is the right one, does not check the output file is what it is supposed to be and the list goes on. Any one of those is probably enough to tank its use here, never mind that all of them apply at some level.

Funny enough, atmosphere just implemented IPS patch support in their NSO loader

 

[FAST6191]

If you are patching plaintext files, in place, under 16 megs, without adding anything to the end, without needing to shift things and can be reasonably sure there are no extraneous headers being added (see NES and SNES ROMs) or odd formats (see the many megadrive/genesis or PS1 formats) then I guess it could work.
As most in memory stuff will have already been decompressed, probably won't be encrypted, be relatively static, probably won't be at the 16 meg mark (outside people having fun with include, lookup tables and incbin I have not seen an executable for a modern PC that sort of size), most likely be subject to shifts and extensive patching, likely will be in a predictable location, is inherently easy to implement a patcher for (barring RLE it is basically just destination and payload data), and if you point it at the wrong version then "your problem" then I guess it could be used for such a setup in the modern world.
In these sorts of circles there has been a long and hard fight to put IPS to bed though so it feels counterproductive to push it on a new system when everything can still be coded from the ground on up.

 

[Draxzelex]

If that's how copyright actually works, it really shouldn't. You shouldn't be allowed to issue takedown notices for a teeny tiny piece of a much larger file. It should be covered under fair use in the same way that book snippets and movie clips in reviews are or how sound samples are fair game in music. It's providing interoperability with other programs. If you deconstructed the file into raw binary form, you'd find portions of it in many digital files due to its small size.

By this logic, all texture and model hacks are illegal, because they are modifications of copyrighted asset files. Rom hacks and total conversions as well. Even if all those things are distributed as patches, those patches still contain portions of modified game logic and graphics data. They are unauthorized derivative works. Why are those given a pass and we haven't shut down filetrip yet? "Because this file only exists for piracy!" You might say. My answer to that is future rom hacks. When you make changes to game files, the signature is no longer valid, correct? Precisely why signature check removal has a legitimate use.

Note this isn't a rant against you, the site, or its policies, rather against Nintendo and other companies who think they own every byte of every digital file ever created.

I agree with what you said. Copyright as a whole is pretty vague but its power is overwhelming. The whole LoveROMs fiasco is a testament to this (which I was suggested to add to this thread). Its seriously outdated and is typically used when things become too popular for their own good, like Pokemon Prism. Now if the people sitting in Washington knew the first thing about the Internet, most if not all of these issues can easily be made clear but I think they're much older than the term 'warez'.

 

[Subtle Demise]

If you are patching plaintext files, in place, under 16 megs, without adding anything to the end, without needing to shift things and can be reasonably sure there are no extraneous headers being added (see NES and SNES ROMs) or odd formats (see the many megadrive/genesis or PS1 formats) then I guess it could work.
As most in memory stuff will have already been decompressed, probably won't be encrypted, be relatively static, probably won't be at the 16 meg mark (outside people having fun with include, lookup tables and incbin I have not seen an executable for a modern PC that sort of size), most likely be subject to shifts and extensive patching, likely will be in a predictable location, is inherently easy to implement a patcher for (barring RLE it is basically just destination and payload data), and if you point it at the wrong version then "your problem" then I guess it could be used for such a setup in the modern world.
In these sorts of circles there has been a long and hard fight to put IPS to bed though so it feels counterproductive to push it on a new system when everything can still be coded from the ground on up.

In the case of the pre-patched ES executable, ips would be a workable solution, considering the files are around 1 MB in size. The ideal solution is to patch the files at boot time, but if this isn't technically feasible for some reason, the other "most legal" method would be a RCM payload that dumps the necessary files from the console and patches them on the pc to be copied to an SD card and used on the switch.

 

[Quantumcat]

@itsjch

 

[itsjch]

@Quantumcat

I know i messed up I snipped it asap

 

[ByteBite]

People don't read the rules before posting prohibited content (the ones they had to read when making their account) so I doubt they'll read this thread either. That said, the effort is appreciated. There's plenty of threads here with people skating on thin ice.

 

[Quantumcat]

People don't read the rules before posting prohibited content (the ones they had to read when making their account) so I doubt they'll read this thread either. That said, the effort is appreciated. There's plenty of threads here with people skating on thin ice.

That's why the first time someone shares a copyrighted file they'll get tagged here, and won't have any ignorance excuse for the next time. If you want to help, reporting any copyright content you see is extremely helpful

 

[Draxzelex]

I added explanations for DevMenu and SDKs in general under what can't be shared in case it wasn't clear already (no need to assume everyone knows everything).

 

[R0B0T0]

I'd encourage you to look at the site rules and tell us what terminology is used there

You can most likely find the phrases “grody to the max”, “gag me with a spoon” and “totally tubular” somewhere on the internet as well, but this doesn’t mean that they are still used in the modern vernacular. ‘Warez’ is a dated term, new lingo replaces old, life moves on.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

You can most likely find the phrases “grody to the max”, “gag me with a spoon” and “totally tubular” somewhere on the internet as well, but this doesn’t mean that they are still used in the modern vernacular. ‘Warez’ is a dated term, new lingo replaces old, life moves on.

That'd be a valid argument if I had told you to look "somewhere on the internet," but I told you to look at this sites rules and guidelines. The fact of the matter is that while the term may be dated, it's still a term that anyone logging into the site should be familiar with, and it's a catch-all term that I've still found to be in relatively common use around the site, at the very least with the staff here if not most users

 

[R0B0T0]

That'd be a valid argument if I had told you to look "somewhere on the internet," but I told you to look at this sites rules and guidelines. The fact of the matter is that while the term may be dated, it's still a term that anyone logging into the site should be familiar with, and it's a catch-all term that I've still found to be in relatively common use around the site, at the very least with the staff here if not most users

I can guarantee you that a sizeable percentage of those 16 and under will be unfamiliar with this term, and that gap is only going to grow. This site has expanded beyond its piracy origins, and there are users who frequent the front page and boards for reasons other than ROMs. I would suggest using a more modern term that will be familiar to those casual users who didn’t grow up with the ‘scene’.

 

[FAST6191]

Best to bring it back then.

Maybe warez/infringing if we absolutely must.

 

[jungla0]

@Draxzelex you might want to recheck the main page because:

Software cracking (known as "breaking" in the 1980s is the modification of software to remove or disable features which are considered undesirable by the person cracking the software, especially copy protection features (including protection against the manipulation of software, serial number, hardware key, date checks and disc check) or software annoyances like nag screens and adware

Piracy and cracking are interchangeable because they permit unauthorized usage of the software so sharing a crack (in this case the one for SX OS, which is a FREE APP with PAID LICENSE) is considered piracy hence shouldn'be allowed.

 

[Jerry2015]

Nice write up
Just nit picking tho

This line under why aren't they shared is a double negitive

You spelled negative wrong. Lol. Just nit-picking.

 

[FAST6191]

Piracy and cracking are interchangeable because they permit unauthorized usage of the software so sharing a crack (in this case the one for SX OS, which is a [B]FREE APP [/B]with [B]PAID LICENSE[/B]) is considered piracy hence shouldn'be allowed.

If you want to make that distinction so be it, however we tend not to around here (and haven't done for the entire time the site has been around). PC stuff is not allowed because it is annoying to keep free of malware and spiders but everything else is discussed endlessly.

 

[Quantumcat]

@nero99

 

[Draxzelex]

There was an incident in the RetroNX thread the other day that I would like to share here for people unaware. OP publicly released an NSP version of RetroNX. Now according to the OP of this thread, that is perfectly legal to share as homebrew is code "brewed" at home and not using any copyrighted material. However packing it into a working NSP (by first packing it into the proper NCA) made usage of a leaked Nintendo SDK. And since the SDK is copyrighted, usage of it and its derivatives puts anyone who publishes such work at great risk for serious legal trouble by Nintendo. This is mostly due to the fact that the NSP can be unpacked and traces of usage via the SDK can be detected. Therefore, the mods at GBATemp have decided to remove it and will only be allowed to back once it has been packed into an NSP without the use of copyrighted tools.

Now would also be a good time to mention that reverse engineering the packing process from the SDK is acceptable so long as source code from the tool itself doesn't make it into the final product. This is how things such as libnx are created due to careful studying of Horizon and other copyrighted content without outright copying said content.