Hacking Look this NTR CFW

[cell9]

cell9 as you can see, there's nothing wrong with CIA support
I didn't really understand why you have followed this line of reasoning

wow

 

[williamcesar2]

wow

???
''wow '' is not a valid argument, btw, I expected a convincing argument, your CFW won't to contain a proprietary format.
to support is one thing and contain is quite another.

 

[NCDyson]

???
''wow '' is not a valid argument, btw, I expected a convincing argument, your CFW won't to contain a proprietary format.
to support is one thing and contain is quite another.

He doesn't have to provide any argument for his stance. If you don't like it, do the work yourself.

 

[williamcesar2]

He doesn't have to provide any argument for his stance. If you don't like it, do the work yourself.

always the same excuse when there is difficulty of argumentation

 

[piratesephiroth]

He doesn't have to provide any argument for his stance. If you don't like it, do the work yourself.

Yep. I don't really understand or like the option of having an outdated CFW that only runs homebrew. I frankly think it's a waste of time and effort but he's doing it for free and sharing it with everyone anyway.

If we don't like we can simply forget about it. It's not like he's obligated to do what we ask.

 

[williamcesar2]

Moreover I am just arguing, I'm not requiring/forcing anything !

 

[Ericss]

He doesn't have to provide any argument for his stance. If you don't like it, do the work yourself.

Dickish post. cell9 cited an inaccurate fact as the reason to why he won't add cia support, and williamcesar2 merely informed to him that it was incorrect.

Yep. I don't really understand or like the option of having an outdated CFW that only runs homebrew.

It's not "an outdated CFW that only runs homebrew". It runs any games that don't require 7.x-8.x encryption and has unique features such as screenshots and memory dumping.

 

[NCDyson]

Dickish post. cell9 cited an inaccurate fact as the reason to why he won't add cia support, and williamcesar2 merely informed to him that it was incorrect.

Hardly. Almost every post by williamceasar2 is complaining because people don't share his ideals on what should be made or released. Second, my post was in reference to his self-entitlement. if cell9 didn't change his mind about adding .cia support even after being informed that he was wrong, he still doesn't owe any answers to anybody about his standing decision. Asking once is debating, asking more is demanding.

always the same excuse when there is difficulty of argumentation

No, always the same answer when people who are too lazy to acquire the skill set necessary to do the work complain because people won't do it for them.

 

[williamcesar2]

Hardly. Almost every post by williamceasar2 is complaining because people don't share his ideals on what should be made or released. Second, my post was in reference to his self-entitlement. if cell9 didn't change his mind about adding .cia support even after being informed that he was wrong, he still doesn't owe any answers to anybody about his standing decision. Asking once is debating, asking more is demanding.


No, always the same answer when people who are too lazy to acquire the skill set necessary to do the work complain because people won't do it for them.

Sorry, invalid reply ! Especially because I'm not forcing(add Cia support) him to do anything.



my post 166 '' Moreover I am just arguing, I'm not requiring/forcing anything !''

 

[Thesolcity]

OTP CFW when?

 

[Bug_Checker_]

For those who need/want a 64-bit build windows version of xdelta
https://code.google.com/p/xdelta/downloads/detail?name=xdelta3-3.0.8.x86-64.exe
SHA1 Checksum: a9c0ab96f18eef3a93759b30481bc7e68f98b483


and a link to the 32-bit build windows version (currently included in patch pack as of 12/12/2014)
https://code.google.com/p/xdelta/downloads/detail?name=xdelta3-3.0.8.x86-32.exe
SHA1 Checksum: 1a008dc74a661946724443a028d58fede7ab1b02

Linux and mac users maybe able to use:
Source code:
https://code.google.com/p/xdelta/downloads/detail?name=xdelta3-3.0.8.tar.xz
SHA1 Checksum: 62c7a029e96c0904bb47a5e2f3de08473a185539


Sources:
https://code.google.com/p/xdelta/downloads/list?
https://code.google.com/p/xdelta/
http://xdelta.org/

 

[pikatsu]

When Gateway new launcher cames out can be used to make a new CFW for new consoles?

 

[Warft]

This cfw working in 9.X?

 

[NCDyson]

When Gateway new launcher cames out can be used to make a new CFW for new consoles?

Rumor has it that gateway's 9.2 support won't have emunand, so it's doubtful, though we won't really know anything until their 9.2 support comes out, and even then it may not even be a launcher.dat...

This cfw working in 9.X?

No, only works on 4.0>4.5, and is an emunand that doesn't have support for firmware version greater than 4.5...

 

[Warft]

Thnk, so (for my) is useless.

 

[Apache Thunder]

Rumor has it that gateway's 9.2 support won't have emunand, so it's doubtful, though we won't really know anything until their 9.2 support comes out, and even then it may not even be a launcher.dat...



No, only works on 4.0>4.5, and is an emunand that doesn't have support for firmware version greater than 4.5...

Launcher.dat was a product of the msett exploit from the old 4.5 fw exploit. I highly doubt the new 9.2 version uses that method of exploit delivery.

As for emunand. I see no reason why they can't. They have the access privileges to install CIA files. This requires kernal access. And due to the amount of features they showed off, it's higly likely they will have emunand support. Whether or not it's available at release is the question, but it's pretty certain that it WILL be supported at some point. They have a pretty good incentive to as they need to keep the new update future proof for all their 9.0-9.2 users.

They also have an incentive to get this release out as soon as possible. The potential customer base they have access to will grow exponentially as there's way more 9.2 consoles out there plus the 7.0+ ones they can also have access to through another method of update they mentioned. The longer they wait, the less consoles their card will work on (since more and more will be updated past 9.2 either accidentally or intentionally as time goes on) and the fewer customers they'll have support from.

EDIT:

Now that I think about it, the new 9.0-9.2 support will likely be more difficult to reverse engineer. This all depends on how the exploit is deployed. Most likely will exploit a system app and won't involve a launcher file like the old 4.5 exploit. So there's no single file easy to find and reverse engineer. The guts of the exploit may reside mostly in the red card itself after the initial install with the gateway code being stored on the red card. (which would serve as a pretty good DRM mechanism)

It will take higher level of reverse engineering to figure it out and remove obfuscation. The Launcher.dat file was easy to work with compared to this as it was a single file you can get at easily.

On the bright side, they might not need to have a classic mode at all now, so retail carts might still work. Because the exploit (like the previous one) can't be made permanent without breaking NAND signature checks, you will eventually need the red card again to put the console back into an exploited state. 9.0-9.2 users may find they have more freedom with what they can do with the console compared to the 4.5 users. (example being that savedatafiler may work on retail carts with the new 9.x version)

I don't think things will be as simple anymore with the new 9.x support though in terms of reverse engineering. I'm sure it will happen eventually, but it will take quite a bit longer for third party versions of the exploit to hit the wild compared to the days of the 4.5 launcher.dat file.

 

[NCDyson]

GW9.0-9.2 Support - The Novel

I originally typed "probably won't be in launcher.dat format", but changed it since I figured some smart ass would make a comment on it. You really can't win for losing

<Speculation>

Sadly, I haven't been keeping up with the latest rumors of gateway's 9.2 support for a couple of days. I'm sure they would find ways to futureproof their update, but an emunand may not even be needed for that. 1.0 launcher.dat just loaded some modified firmware and did a soft reset. Honestly don't even remember why the emunand became necessary, but I would imagine they've learned a lot since then. For the new version, updating could end up being as simple as "Download OUR update from our site, then place it on the SD card(or microSD card) and re-launch.

As far as reverse engineering the new gateway exploit, well, the old one was already a pain to the people with the skills, and given the last CFW leak, I'm not personally keeping my hopes up that anyone with the skills will get around to sharing if they did RE it.

Again though, all speculation. Don't quote me on it.

</Speculation>

This forum really needs a speculation tag...

 

[qaz015393]

Is this safe to use/do, I already have my emunad on 9.2.0 [but I do have a backup of 4.4] and was seeing if I can use this without any issues/ damage to my system or gateway card. Since I only have 1 of each and cand spend more $ if anything happens. I was going to try this and then go back to gateway omega 2.6.

 

[_eyCaRambA_]

Is this safe to use/do, I already have my emunad on 9.2.0 [but I do have a backup of 4.4] and was seeing if I can use this without any issues/ damage to my system or gateway card. Since I only have 1 of each and cand spend more $ if anything happens. I was going to try this and then go back to gateway omega 2.6.

Yeah, I've switched between 9.2 EMUNAND and NTR CFW EMUNAND without any problems by replacing the corresponding launchers on the SD card and injecting the correct EMUNAND with the tool.

 

[Ericss]

Does anyone know if it's possible to run Ninjhax on NTR CFW? Because it always hangs at 20% when trying to run the exploit for me.