Hacking Question (atmosphere 0.9.4) how can i move my installed game in sysnand to emunand?

[MultiKoopa]

If you don"t want to recreate your emuMMC then you'll need to either back up the game from your sysNAND using a homebrew (this tool should work), which means booting your sysNAND under CFW at least temporarily, or to download the game from the internet. Then you can reinstall it on your emuMMC CFW with a NSP installer like goldleaf (no need to copy the Nintendo folder nor to edit emummc.ini in this case).

shouldn't be any risk to booting sysNAND under CFW if you're offline the whole time and don't do anything but run the dump tool, yeah?

 

[Draxzelex]

shouldn't be any risk to booting sysNAND under CFW if you're offline the whole time and don't do anything but run the dump tool, yeah?

No, it is still a risk regardless if you're offline or online and just running the tool.

 

[MultiKoopa]

damn, really??

 

[Draxzelex]

damn, really??

I mean I don't understand the surprise. As soon as you hack, you risk yourself at getting banned. This has always been the reality of CFW and homebrew.

 

[MultiKoopa]

wait so even running cfw on sysnand while offline the whole time might get you banned? even if you don't run anything besides titles you already own? how does that work

 

[Draxzelex]

wait so even running cfw on sysnand while offline the whole time might get you banned? even if you don't run anything besides titles you already own? how does that work

The console logs everything and stores it within its own internal memory. This is why people are banned even if they use something like Airplane Mode, 90DNS, or Incognito; all of these utilities don't prevent bans, they merely delay them.

 

[LeMageFro]

Ok in theory yes there is always a risk, but in practice atmosphere has been able to replicate HOS's telemetry very accurately for a while now, and many users (myself included) can report using atmos online without getting banned. The only thing I'm not sure of is if using a non-European account, which lack one option to disable some telemetry that European accounts have, really makes a difference or not. But a European account with telemetry disabled definitely seems safe as long as you know what you're doing.
Sure you can always say "but you guys are just waiting to be banned" but come on, it's been like two years now. So yeah if you only used atmos offline and never launched a game you didn't buy legitimately nor used game mods I really wouldn't worry too much.

 

[LeMageFro]

Here it is, from SciresM himself :

 

[Draxzelex]

Here it is, from SciresM himself :
View attachment 251441

I mean everyone is fallible. This is the same guy who claimed TX had nothing for Mariko/Lite and there have been other times when he was wrong about stuff. Also I can consider him an expert from a hardware and software side of the device but not so much when it comes to banning since that is done by Nintendo. Plus ReSwitched is not the holy grail of banning information. I don't mean to brag but I'd like to think my thread is more collective and objective when it comes to the banning situation.

 

[LeMageFro]

I mean everyone is fallible. This is the same guy who claimed TX had nothing for Mariko/Lite and there have been other times when he was wrong about stuff. Also I can consider him an expert from a hardware and software side of the device but not so much when it comes to banning since that is done by Nintendo. Plus ReSwitched is not the holy grail of banning information. I don't mean to brag but I'd like to think my thread is more collective and objective when it comes to the banning situation.

Yes I agree that no one in infaillible and that people should check different source of information. All I can say for sure is that what SciresM said is consistent with my personal experience.

 

[Draxzelex]

Yes I agree that no one in infaillible and that people should check different source of information. All I can say for sure is that what SciresM said is consistent with my personal experience.

So then what does that mean when I say what he says doesn't align with my personal experiences which includes all of the data I have gathered? Both of us cannot be right so one of us has to be wrong. And like I said earlier, SciresM may know a lot of things about the Switch but his knowledge is more general as opposed to people who specialize in specific fields such as me when it comes to bans.

 

[LeMageFro]

So then what does that mean when I say what he says doesn't align with my personal experiences which includes all of the data I have gathered? Both of us cannot be right so one of us has to be wrong. And like I said earlier, SciresM may know a lot of things about the Switch but his knowledge is more general as opposed to people who specialize in specific fields such as me when it comes to bans.

Well if I assume you're genuine when you say that from your experience (and data collection) there has been some people who got banned for doing only what SciresM describes, and if at the same time you assume I'm genuine when I say that I've been online with CFW for a very long time and I have zero reason to think I'll be banned, then the conclusion is clearly that both case can happen and we lack the understanding of what decides which situation applies.
Now as for the original question asked, "is there a risk to get banned", that would imply that the answer is yes, but I never said the opposite, I just said that people on this site tend to overestimate that risk.

Now if you want my personal intuition it's that a lot of people don't really understand what they do with their hacked switch and they wrongly attribute the ban to one of the things described by SciresM when they actually did something else. Basically I suspect that SciresM is right when he says that :

I doubt this is true. All reported verified bans are for piracy, cheating online, or dumping your client certificate. You might have used a homebrew that stole your clcert and sent it to someone that used it or something.

— Michael (@SciresM) March 24, 2020

My personal confidence on this intuition is not extremely high though I will admit.

Edit : I also think that you underestimate how well SciresM understands how telemetry and network comunication with nintendos servers work. The man rewrote all of these modules from scratch, so I think his understanding could be weighted against a lot of reports from random users.

 

[Draxzelex]

Well if I assume you're genuine when you say that from your experience (and data collection) there has been some people who got banned for doing only what SciresM describes, and if at the same time you assume I'm genuine when I say that I've been online with CFW for a very long time and I have zero reason to think I'll be banned, then the conclusion is clearly that both case can happen and we lack the understanding of what decides which situation applies.
Now as for the original question asked, "is there a risk to get banned", that would imply that the answer is yes, but I never said the opposite, I just said that people on this site tend to overestimate that risk.

Now if you want my personal intuition it's that a lot of people don't really understand what they do with their hacked switch and they wrongly attribute the ban to one of the things described by SciresM when they actually did something else. Basically I suspect that SciresM is right when he says that : https://twitter.com/SciresM/status/1242286184182644737
My personal confidence on this intuition is not extremely high though I will admit.

I mean for that, the counterargument is simple and that is to cite Occam's Razor. It involves more work to prove someone is banned for more than what they claim than just taking them at face value even if others provide cases that contradict one's own experience.

I have been observing the banning situation ever since the first banwave so that is about 2-3 years worth of experience and I have been able to reach some logical conclusions that might explain these irregularities. For one thing, Nintendo not banning everyone is actually beneficial for Nintendo because this makes it harder for us to discern the actual causes for bans. This is especially true when there are plenty of people not banned for the traditional causes such as piracy or cheating. Otherwise, there is no other logical explanation outside of claiming Nintendo "forgot" to ban them. This is now the third time I am stating this but SciresM's knowledge is more broad unlike mine which is solely focused on bans. He hasn't analyzed the data nor claims such as myself to reach these conclusions and simply sticks to the tried and true people only get banned for piracy which has been demonstrably proven false.

 

[LeMageFro]

I mean for that, the counterargument is simple and that is to cite Occam's Razor. It involves more work to prove someone is banned for more than what they claim than just taking them at face value even if others provide cases that contradict one's own experience.

I have been observing the banning situation ever since the first banwave so that is about 2-3 years worth of experience and I have been able to reach some logical conclusions that might explain these irregularities. For one thing, Nintendo not banning everyone is actually beneficial for Nintendo because this makes it harder for us to discern the actual causes for bans. This is especially true when there are plenty of people not banned for the traditional causes such as piracy or cheating. Otherwise, there is no other logical explanation outside of claiming Nintendo "forgot" to ban them. This is now the third time I am stating this but SciresM's knowledge is more broad unlike mine which is solely focused on bans. He hasn't analyzed the data nor claims such as myself to reach these conclusions and simply sticks to the tried and true people only get banned for piracy which has been demonstrably proven false.

Alright, since I assume everything you said about your data collection is honest and since you're clearly way more confident on this topic that I am I'll admit that you're probably right.
I'm genuinely curious about how you have "demonstrably proven" data about people who got banned despite not doing the things described by SciresM ? Did it happen to you directly or did you get to witness it ? Or is it just that it's been reported so much that it would be unlikely that none of these reports are true ? (Which is I assume what you meant when you mentioned Occam's razor)

 

[Draxzelex]

Alright, since I assume everything you said about your data collection is honest and since you're clearly way more confident on this topic that I am I'll admit that you're probably right.
I'm genuinely curious about how you have "demonstrably proven" data about people who got banned despite not doing the things described by SciresM ? Did it happen to you directly or did you get to witness it ? Or is it just that it's been reported so much that it would be unlikely that none of these reports are true ? (Which is I assume what you meant when you mentioned Occam's razor)

It was reported to me and all of that data is publicly viewable in the spreadsheet. All I do is whenever somebody submits a ban report, I convert their answers into the data you see on the Google Doc. For me to question what people submit invalidates the entire thing because there is no objective reasoning to do so hence why Occam's Razor is so important. You have to provide proof that they are lying. You or other people's subjective experience cannot refute another person's subjective experience. This is what a lot of people misunderstand about the banning situation because it is mostly subjective but at the end of the day, what has and will always hold true is that Nintendo bans people who violate the ToS. People getting banned just for running CFW makes sense because that is the one objective statement we can all agree on. The only thing up for debate is the likelihood which is purely subjective.

 

[LeMageFro]

It was reported to me and all of that data is publicly viewable in the spreadsheet. All I do is whenever somebody submits a ban report, I convert their answers into the data you see on the Google Doc. For me to question what people submit invalidates the entire thing because there is no objective reasoning to do so hence why Occam's Razor is so important. You have to provide proof that they are lying. You or other people's subjective experience cannot refute another person's subjective experience. This is what a lot of people misunderstand about the banning situation because it is mostly subjective but at the end of the day, what has and will always hold true is that Nintendo bans people who violate the ToS. People getting banned just for running CFW makes sense because that is the one objective statement we can all agree on. The only thing up for debate is the likelihood which is purely subjective.

I guess I was the one underestimating the risk after all ^^ . Thanks for the answers, that was interesting.

 

[FFTfanatic]

No you will be fine since pirated and legitimate games look identical once installed.

Hi, sorry to bother you but I know you are the authority around here on ban risks and ban stats.

Currently, I run Atmosphere emuMMC with incognito etc., and reserve activities that involve Nintendo servers for sysMMC on stock/official firmware.
Like the TC of this OP however, there are some games I would like to play on both, but if possible, not have duplicate installs of the games on both so that I can minimise SD storage space consumption.

Would pointing the emuMMC at the Nintendo folder used by the sysMMC (via LeMageFro's method above of editing the emummc.ini to replace the line "nintendo_path=emuMMC/RAW1/Nintendo" with "nintendo_path=Nintendo") cause a ban (or increase the risk of one) in your knowledge / experience?

I realise you can't give any castiron guarantees and I know that with CFW there are always unknown/unseen risks but I would appreciate your expertise.

Many thanks in advance

 

[Draxzelex]

Hi, sorry to bother you but I know you are the authority around here on ban risks and ban stats.

Currently, I run Atmosphere emuMMC with incognito etc., and reserve activities that involve Nintendo servers for sysMMC on stock/official firmware.
Like the TC of this OP however, there are some games I would like to play on both, but if possible, not have duplicate installs of the games on both so that I can minimise SD storage space consumption.

Would pointing the emuMMC at the Nintendo folder used by the sysMMC (via LeMageFro's method above of editing the emummc.ini to replace the line "nintendo_path=emuMMC/RAW1/Nintendo" with "nintendo_path=Nintendo") cause a ban (or increase the risk of one) in your knowledge / experience?

I realise you can't give any castiron guarantees and I know that with CFW there are always unknown/unseen risks but I would appreciate your expertise.

Many thanks in advance

Realistically it should not because what most people don't realize is that pirated content looks the same on the SD card as it does compared to legitimate content. The only difference between pirated and legitimate content are in the tickets which are only ever stored in the internal storage. Therefore, it should not be an issue for sysMMC and emuMMC to share the same folder.

 

[Halitendo]

Realistically it should not because what most people don't realize is that pirated content looks the same on the SD card as it does compared to legitimate content. The only difference between pirated and legitimate content are in the tickets which are only ever stored in the internal storage. Therefore, it should not be an issue for sysMMC and emuMMC to share the same folder.

So would it also be safe to play online games like Splatoon 3 when these two share the same folder, even if there's "pirated content" in that shared folder? I'm new to all of this homebrewing and stuff, and I can't be too careful, right?

 

[Draxzelex]

So would it also be safe to play online games like Splatoon 3 when these two share the same folder, even if there's "pirated content" in that shared folder? I'm new to all of this homebrewing and stuff, and I can't be too careful, right?

Yes, that's exactly what I said. As long as you aren't running CFW or hombrew, you won't get banned.