Homebrew Official [Download] Decrypt9 - Open Source Decryption Tools (WIP)

[DjoeN]

And what if you place the nand's in the root of the SD?

 

[Just Passing By]

And what if you place the nand's in the root of the SD?

I put the NANB.BIN in the /Decrypt9 in the root and also only in the root, but always the same error...

 

[DjoeN]

Damned, my fault for quick reading the post :/

 

[Just Passing By]

I have problems with restoring the sysNAND on my O3DS. The working folders are in the root of the sd card, but Decrypt9WIP only shows me the Game directory: /D9Game, not even the Work directory: /Decrypt9, but it exists .

The sysNAND restore failed with:
"Failed retrieving the file names list
NAND Restore: failed!

Press B to return, START to reboot."

I put the NANB.BIN in the /Decrypt9 in the root and also only in the root, but always the same error...

Umm. First make sure you have the latest version. That seems to be good a lot of times. It's really weird you're trying to restore sysnand and it's looking at the wrong folder, but put your backup in your /Decrypt9/ folder:
(Emu)NAND Restore(!): This fully restores your SysNAND or EmuNAND from the provided NAND.bin file (needs to be in the /Decrypt9/ work folder). Be careful not to restore a corrupted NAND.bin file.

And rename it to "sysNAND.bin". Perhaps it won't read other name formats other than the ones provided. Also, try deleting the D9Game folder and see if it autodirects itself to the Decrypt9 one.

 

[d0k3]

I have problems with restoring the sysNAND on my O3DS. The working folders are in the root of the sd card, but Decrypt9WIP only shows me the Game directory: /D9Game, not even the Work directory: /Decrypt9, but it exists .

The sysNAND restore failed with:
"Failed retrieving the file names list
NAND Restore: failed!

Press B to return, START to reboot."

I put the NANB.BIN in the /Decrypt9 in the root and also only in the root, but always the same error...

Try the newest test build: http://workupload.com/file/1rXPv1DM
... and let me know if that helps!

Proepr release is coming soon, btw. I just need some mroe testing for non critical stuff.

 

[A_Random_Guy]

Nice to see that we can restore NANDs and keep A9LH.

 

[d0k3]

Umm. First make sure you have the latest version. That seems to be good a lot of times. It's really weird you're trying to restore sysnand and it's looking at the wrong folder, but put your backup in your /Decrypt9/ folder:
(Emu)NAND Restore(!): This fully restores your SysNAND or EmuNAND from the provided NAND.bin file (needs to be in the /Decrypt9/ work folder). Be careful not to restore a corrupted NAND.bin file.

And rename it to "sysNAND.bin". Perhaps it won't read other name formats other than the ones provided. Also, try deleting the D9Game folder and see if it autodirects itself to the Decrypt9 one.

The last test build will find your NAND backup in both places. If it does not, it belongs into the Decrypt9/ folder. You are protected from corrupted NAND.bin files as long as you don't use the new 'NAND Restore (forced)' option. And the file must have 'NAND' (case-insensitive) before the dot and 'BIN' (case-insensitive) as extension. 'ThisIsMyNaNd.bIN' for example will work.

 

[Just Passing By]

The last test build will find your NAND backup in both places. If it does not, it belongs into the Decrypt9/ folder. You are protected from corrupted NAND.bin files as long as you don't use the new 'NAND Restore (forced)' option. And the file must have 'NAND' (case-insensitive) before the dot and 'BIN' (case-insensitive) as extension. 'ThisIsMyNaNd.bIN' for example will work.

Oh that's interesting. So I take it that the new 'NAND Restore (forced)' option is for if there's a bug and D9 gives off an "invalid file size" error (or something like it) and you really need to restore a backup? And how does D9 protect you from a corrupted NAND.bin file? What does it check?

 

[seeboo]

Thank you guys for your replies. i'll give it a try and tell you if it works.

 

[d0k3]

Oh that's interesting. So I take it that the new 'NAND Restore (forced)' option is for if there's a bug and D9 gives off an "invalid file size" error (or something like it) and you really need to restore a backup? And how does D9 protect you from a corrupted NAND.bin file? What does it check?

D9 checks NAND header, size (backup must have at least minimum size), magic numbers for each encrypted partition (effectively, making it impossible to restore another 3DS consoles NAND backup) and FIRM0 / FIRM1 integrity. In fact, the forced option should never be required, but it is at the moment for A9LH enabled backups, because those have a deliberately corrupted FIRM0.

By the way, even the forced option checks size and NAND header making deliberate bricking hard .

 

[seeboo]

Try the newest test build: http://workupload.com/file/1rXPv1DM
... and let me know if that helps!

Proepr release is coming soon, btw. I just need some mroe testing for non critical stuff.

Yeahh, sysNAND restore successful done, keep up the good work, guys .

 

[Deleted User]

Try the newest test build: http://workupload.com/file/1rXPv1DM
... and let me know if that helps!

Proepr release is coming soon, btw. I just need some mroe testing for non critical stuff.

It works for injecting FBI in HS. Good job as always. But I think It's better to split "EmuNand Options" to "EmuNand Options" itself and "RedNand" like EmuNand9 did. Thanks for this excellent tools .

 

[d0k3]

It works for injecting FBI in HS. Good job as always. But I think It's better to split "EmuNand Options" to "EmuNand Options" itself and "RedNand" like EmuNand9 did. Thanks for this excellent tools .

Nope. A RedNAND is just another type of EmuNAND, and you can either have GW EmuNAND formatting or RedNAND, not both. Splitting this would make no sense at all other than providing two differently named options for the exactly same thing and confusing users.

 

[Deleted User]

Nope. A RedNAND is just another type of EmuNAND, and you can either have GW EmuNAND formatting or RedNAND, not both. Splitting this would make no sense at all other than providing two differently named options for the exactly same thing and confusing users.

Alright then. I got it. Keep up good work @d0k3 .

 

[Intronaut]

I tried to inject CTRNAND and TWLP partition to sysnand but it gives me decryption error. The TWLN and AGBSAVE partition injects perfectly.

My emunand is in 10.6 and was made with emunand9

 

[d0k3]

I tried to inject CTRNAND and TWLP partition to sysnand but it gives me decryption error. The TWLN and AGBSAVE partition injects perfectly.

My emunand is in 10.6 and was made with emunand9

Using a9lh, missing the slot0x05keyY.bin file and didn't read the readme :/.

EDIT: You say you you also have trouble injecting TWLP? Try again, that's almost impossible. Give me the exact error message if that persists.

 

[Intronaut]

Using a9lh, missing the slot0x05keyY.bin file and didn't read the readme :/.

EDIT: You say you you also have trouble injecting TWLP? Try again, that's almost impossible. Give me the exact error message if that persists.

Yes, I had that file. But I solve my problem restoring my emuNAND.bin to sysNAND keeping a9lh with the latest build. Thanks for your work.

 

[d0k3]

Yes, I had that file. But I solve my problem restoring my emuNAND.bin to sysNAND keeping a9lh with the latest build. Thanks for your work.

So... your NAND was somehow corrupted? That's the only way you can get that error. Do you have any idea how that happened?

 

[Filo97]

@d0k3 wait, if you said that rednand is just another type of emunand, then why you splitted the "restore file to emunand" and "restore file to rednand" in emunand9?

 

[d0k3]

@d0k3 wait, if you said that rednand is just another type of emunand, then why you splitted the "restore file to emunand" and "restore file to rednand" in emunand9?

Because it is different formatting. Think about it like formatting your computers hard drive - depending on your OS, you can decide what filesystem to use (on Windows: FAT32 / NTFS). Although any choice will lead to your desired result (being able to store files on there), a simple 'format drive' without the choice of filesystem wouldn't be enough for most users. In turn (to stay with that comparison), think about instead of having a 'Windows Explorer', you'd have a 'FAT Explorer' and a 'NTFS Explorer' - how would you like that?