[Idea] Making 2.1 Firmware run on emuNAND

Discussion in '3DS - Flashcards & Custom Firmwares' started by Wahrrelasse, Jun 11, 2016.

  1. Wahrrelasse
    OP

    Wahrrelasse Advanced Member

    Newcomer
    71
    10
    Apr 28, 2016
    Gambia, The
    Just a random idea: Would making 2.1 FW work on emuNAND the already safe A9LH installing guide even safer? I mean you could test if your emuNAND did downgrade correctly, before flashing it to sysNAND. Maybe the effort isn't worth it, but since I'm not a dev I don't know that.
    Sorry if this is a stupid idea.
     
  2. Robz8

    Robz8 Coolest of TWL

    Member
    6,505
    2,729
    Oct 1, 2010
    United States
    No, because OTP is locked early on system boot.
     
    Koko-Kun and mironicurse like this.
  3. solress

    solress Not a dev

    Member
    579
    306
    May 12, 2016
    Netherlands
    Between here and there
    The way cfw works can't be changed (for now) making a 2.1 emuNAND impossible to open, an unpatched sysNAND is possible due to the way it works
     
  4. Swiftloke

    Swiftloke Hwaaaa!

    Member
    1,769
    1,508
    Jan 26, 2015
    United States
    Nowhere
    Last edited by Swiftloke, Jun 11, 2016
    Marko76, Ricken, OctopusRift and 3 others like this.
  5. Wahrrelasse
    OP

    Wahrrelasse Advanced Member

    Newcomer
    71
    10
    Apr 28, 2016
    Gambia, The
    Well I didn't intent to dump the OTP with emuNAND i just wanted to check if the firmware is running or not, because i don't want to end up with a bricked 3ds after the One Click Setup
     
  6. jurassicplayer

    jurassicplayer Completionist Themer

    Member
    4,352
    494
    Mar 7, 2009
    United States
    Pantsuland
    Two out of three replies didn't read the question before answering and three out of three didn't even answer it. SURE IS GREAT WHEN THE MEMBERS READ.
    Anyways, what solress said about no CFW being able to use an emunand 2.1 which is why it doesn't work currently. Nobody is really making it work partly because it's legacy software and aside from that singular step to get the OTP, there isn't much use to having a working v2.1 emunand. Not to mention that dok3, Plailect and co. have a number of verification steps in the other programs that should at the very least ease your mind on the validity of your v2.1 emunand.

    tl;dr: it just isn't very worth it as long as people are paying attention.
     
    Last edited by jurassicplayer, Jun 11, 2016
    Vappy likes this.
  7. MelonGx

    MelonGx GBAtemp Advanced Maniac

    Member
    1,630
    438
    Jan 8, 2009
    China
    2.1 EmuNAND is still important since you can verify if your 2.1 DG is a bad downgrade or not to avoid a brick on flashing bad downgraded 2.1 RedNAND into SysNAND.
     
    Razorbacktrack likes this.
  8. SirBeethoven

    SirBeethoven 3.145.... something. E=mc2

    Member
    1,795
    548
    Nov 26, 2015
    United States
    Perhaps going on discord and asking around (possibly asking a few Devs and PM'ing them) may answer your question. The Devs who create these types of this would (most-probably unless there's a silent dev) be of the only help to you. I wish you luck! It would be nice to figure out if the NAND had downgraded correctly but it's mostly in user error that most bricks occur.
     
  9. astronautlevel

    astronautlevel But he's a guy

    Member
    3,943
    4,698
    Jan 26, 2016
    United States
    That Nightly Site™
    tl;dr: Nintendo completely rewrote NFIRM from 2.1 to 3.0, whcih means all our EmuNAND patches won't work at all. We'd need to RE completely new EmuNAND patches and it just isn't worth the effort (especially given OTPHelper verifies the downgrade).
     
    SirBeethoven likes this.
  10. Lilith Valentine

    Lilith Valentine GBATemp's Wolfdog™ I drool on my knife

    Member
    19,390
    19,793
    Sep 13, 2009
    Antarctica
    Between insane and insecure
    There's a lot of technical reasons to why CFW's don't support 2.1 emuNANDs, but the big reason is because there's no reason to. All of the tools have safe guards to make sure the downgrade is successful and the flash is successful, thus eliminating the reason to even boot into the emuNAND.
    Just pay attention and you should be ok.
     
    SirBeethoven likes this.
  11. Queno138

    Queno138 Ravens

    Member
    2,411
    782
    Sep 18, 2010
    Senegal
    Luigi's Dark Mansion
    If I'm not mistaken, the OTP helper checks every title versions' number, to ensure that they have all been downgraded to 2.1 (on emunand), and it only flashes it over to sysnand when the version numbers all match up.

    And since Plaisysupdater also checks the MD5 of every title,
    When both is accepted, it would mean your downgrade succeeded.
     
    Last edited by Queno138, Jun 12, 2016
  12. Wahrrelasse
    OP

    Wahrrelasse Advanced Member

    Newcomer
    71
    10
    Apr 28, 2016
    Gambia, The
    I didn't know that OTP Helper also checks it. Well then, this thread is kinda pointless now xD
     
  13. Queno138

    Queno138 Ravens

    Member
    2,411
    782
    Sep 18, 2010
    Senegal
    Luigi's Dark Mansion
    I can't say for the previous version,
    but while I doing A9LH for my friend's N3DS 2 nights ago, I saw that it was doing a "title version" check, which took a long while ><
     
  14. Newest Nick Team

    Newest Nick Team GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    236
    81
    Nov 28, 2014
    United States
    You don't wanna know. :P
    This might something you don't wanna believe, but...

    [​IMG]

    So I extracted the 1.0 and 2.1 FIRMs decrypted AND encrypted from my O3DS EmuNANDs via Decrypt9WIP's latest version, and sent them to Gateway for them to add to their next version for EmuNAND 2.1 checking (1.0 is also included just cause of rarity). 3.0 wasn't included due to me failing to install the NATIVE_FIRM from the NUS Servers CIA (Used 3DNUS Mod latest version).

    Looks like what we didn't know the entire time is that they have a separate tech team, so when they reply again that if it works or not, I'll get back to you.
     
  15. astronautlevel

    astronautlevel But he's a guy

    Member
    3,943
    4,698
    Jan 26, 2016
    United States
    That Nightly Site™
    Unless GW decides to reverse engineer the 2.1 NFIRM again in order to create brand new EmuNAND patches it isn't going to happen. Hell, we don't even know if EmuNAND patches are possible on 2.1.
     
  16. Newest Nick Team

    Newest Nick Team GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    236
    81
    Nov 28, 2014
    United States
    You don't wanna know. :P
    Well, patches... you mean like "signature patches"?

    IDK, but maybe we should compare 2.1 and the main NATIVE_FIRM we use today. We need to look at Luma3DS's source code to see which patch it goes on though. I'll PM the 2.1 NFIRM decrypted bin and my decrypted NFIRM if you want.

    Just like this code (On 11.0 down to 4.0 though)...

    Code

    Either that, or I can tell Gateway to not use those main signatures they do for their 2.1 EmuNAND boot...
     
  17. astronautlevel

    astronautlevel But he's a guy

    Member
    3,943
    4,698
    Jan 26, 2016
    United States
    That Nightly Site™
    I'm not talking about signature patches. Loading from EmuNAND itself is a patch, and because the FIRM was completely rewritten sometime between 3.0 and 4.0, none of the EmuNAND patches we use today will work, as in booting a 2.1 emunand is impossible until someone reverses 2.1 NFIRM. Even if we reverse 2.1 NFIRM who knows if it will be possible to patch it to load from EmuNAND.

    Also don't bother PMing me the FIRM. I have it already ;)