Hacking Nintendo Switch Banning Hub & Warning

[V-Temp]

Currently no ban for only SX offline use has been reported. Users who used SX offline and received a ban either had used Homebrew or LayeredFS before

Might want to check again:

:

Banned: Yes
Used any CDN Downloader: No
Cleared Error Logs prior to going Online with nx-dreport: No
Disabled "Send Error Information" in System Settings: No
SX OS used: Yes
SX OS used online: No
Played with SX Backups online: No
Layered FS Used: No
Layered FS Used online: No
Played with Layered FS Injects online: No
Homebrew/CFW Offline: SX OS
Connect internet with homebrew/CFW: No
Connect to eShop during CFW/homebrew: No
Played with Layered FS Injects with OwnCert.: No
Does the eShop work: No
Backups updated: Yes
WiFi settings deleted: No
Airplane mode: Yes
AutoRCM: No
SX OS Version used when Online: 5.1.0
Auto-Update Software: No

Proof:
https://streamable.com/b6amh

 

[Draxzelex]

It seems that I messed up rewriting one of the questions and logging in the data leading to a misunderstanding. The homebrew/CFW used/offline question is reserved for those who have not used TX NOR LayeredFS. However, I thought this was clear so I flagged everyone who used either TX or LayeredFS automatically, even if they answered no for this question. Allow me to be clear: those who have used SX only, were banned, and have Homebrew/CFW tagged as a yes is a misnomer and I take full responsibility. From my memory, at least 3 users did not use LayeredFS and did originally answer no to this question meaning they were potentially banned for only running SX OS. For everyone who was banned with SX OS, I will double-check their answers and make amends as necessary.

EDIT: This should go without saying but I will leave those who used LayeredFS with a yes for using any homebrew/CFW. We can all more or less agree that LayeredFS on its own is more than capable of leading to a ban.

EDIT 2: Turns out one of the banned SX OS users played an emulator as well. This has already been reflected in the spreadsheet as well in "Statistics for the Lazy".

 

[V-Temp]

It seems that I messed up rewriting one of the questions and logging in the data leading to a misunderstanding. The homebrew/CFW used/offline question is reserved for those who have not used TX NOR LayeredFS. However, I thought this was clear so I flagged everyone who used either TX or LayeredFS automatically, even if they answered no for this question. Allow me to be clear: those who have used SX only, were banned, and have Homebrew/CFW tagged as a yes is a misnomer and I take full responsibility. From my memory, at least 3 users did not use LayeredFS and did originally answer no to this question meaning they were potentially banned for only running SX OS. However, for everyone who was banned with SX OS, I will double-check their answers and make amends as necessary.

No harm, it's a lot of data and I've personally been trying to track it myself. Some of the data misunderstandings are also being perpetuated by what is effectively corporate cheerleaders.

 

[link42586]

If clearing the

So, my switch is now banned as of this morning. I was booting into Hekate to run Retroarch cores for the past 2 weeks. I've never used AutoRCM, never used LayeredFS. Never been a problem up until now. I *did* clear the logs yesterday night however which I have never done before, and gets up this morning to see the console banned.

To me, it seems like clearing the logs is a big red flag.

Wonder if they can clear just the bad logs...like the errors that are from normal use that aren't shady it keeps so that suddenly u don't have a perfectly clean log that seems suspicious as can be..It should keep just A few errors to keep it not obvious u know. But I guess at that point u would have to do alot of research to find out what errors are what and know what errors to keep and all that. But idk just A thought.

 

[lukhart]

Might want to check again:

I've checked, and as stated in the sheet and draxzelex, he used an emulator, so still no 100% SX offline ban.

Don't worry, I'm not saying SX offline is ban immune. But it has to happen yet on a next banwave or something

 

[V-Temp]

I've checked, and as stated in the sheet and draxzelex, he used an emulator, so still no 100% SX offline ban.

Don't worry, I'm not saying SX offline is ban immune. But it has to happen yet on a next banwave or something

Nope. Different switch.

nah, I used a brand new switch, with a new NN account

 

[Draxzelex]

I think I'm going crazy. Now I'm doubting whether it was MitsukiUchiwa who said that he used a GBA emulator for his Switch because I can't find any evidence of that in his posts. But he also helped compile a list of working GBA games for the Switch so it has to be him. The worst part is I can see the part where he mentions using a new Switch and Nintendo account so I don't know when he used the emulator. Curse you, GBATemp's Search Function!

 

[V-Temp]

I think I'm going crazy. Now I'm doubting whether it was MitsukiUchiwa who said that he used a GBA emulator for his Switch because I can't find any evidence of that in his posts. But he also helped compile a list of working GBA games for the Switch so it has to be him. The worst part is I can see the part where he mentions using a new Switch and Nintendo account so I don't know when he used the emulator. Curse you, GBATemp's Search Function!

He clarified it was two different switches. Nothing about the second has shown to have touched anything but TX.

 

[Draxzelex]

He clarified it was two different switches. Nothing about the second has shown to have touched anything but TX.

I swear, I need an editor for this type of stuff. I finally found out who was the one with the GBA emulator! He was the one mentioned in "Statistics for the Lazy" but for some reason I decided to tag the other guy with the emulator. The reason I mixed them up I think is because their names are right next to each other when I sort the sheet. Sorry for the confusion everyone, 2 people have now been banned using SX OS alone!

 

[KongsNutz]

Banned: Y
If banned, provide proof (coming)
Downloaded with CDN: N
Cleared Error Logs prior to going Online with nx-dreport: N
Disabled "Send Error Information" in System Settings: N
SX OS used: Y
SX OS used while online: N
Played online SX OS Backups: N
Layered FS Used: N
Layered FS Used while online: N
Played online Layered FS Injects: N
Homebrew/non-TX CFW Offline: N
Connect to Internet with homebrew/CFW: N
Connect to eShop while using CFW/homebrew: N
Played with Layered FS Injects with Own Cert.: N
Can you access the eShop: N
Backups updated: N (CFW or OFW)
Wi-Fi settings deleted: Y
Airplane mode: Y
AutoRCM: Y
SX OS Version used when Online: 1.2
Auto-Update Software: N

Note: Installed SXOS (nonpro) today and have only played Mario Aces offline, in SXOS.

 

[V-Temp]

I swear, I need an editor for this type of stuff. I finally found out who was the one with the GBA emulator! He was the one mentioned in "Statistics for the Lazy" but for some reason I decided to tag the other guy with the emulator. Sorry for the confusion everyone, 2 people have now been banned using SX OS alone!

Look there's another right on queue.

Like I said this sample is biased to LFS. I suspect the bans are probably par in a larger sample size but that's impossible to gauge.

One thing I know is that, if TXs numbers are true, were going to lose a lot of Gen1 switches for this bs. :/

 

[Draxzelex]

Look there's another right on queue.

Like I said this sample is biased to LFS. I suspect the bans are probably par in a larger sample size but that's impossible to gauge.

One thing I know is that, if TXs numbers are true, were going to lose a lot of Gen1 switches for this bs. :/

The timing could not have been more perfect. And while I agree it may appear biased towards LayeredFS, for some strange reason, there are a lot of people who are not banned due to using it. The only trend I can see is those who used LayeredFS and are not banned also used LayeredFS Online. This strangely complements the now 3 TX users who were banned using a fully offline SX OS. Either people are outright lying or Nintendo is punishing those who actively tried to hide their tracks first. It is beyond mind boggling.

 

[V-Temp]

The timing could not have been more perfect. And while I agree it may appear biased towards LayeredFS, for some strange reason, there are a lot of people who are not banned due to using it. The only trend I can see is those who used LayeredFS and are not banned also used LayeredFS Online. This strangely complements the now 3 TX users who were banned using a fully offline SX OS. Either people are outright lying or Nintendo is punishing those who actively tried to hide their tracks first. It is beyond mind boggling.

Just assume random VAC rather than intent. It is the most Occam's razor solution, and perfectly logical.

 

[Draxzelex]

Just assume random VAC rather than intent. It is the most Occam's razor solution, and perfectly logical.

The ironic thing is I can't tell if Nintendo is doing it on purpose or by accident. You literally cannot predict what Nintendo will do. They are both evil geniuses and as dumb as a thumb.

 

[tyler004]

I use the gba emulator not sx os or layeredfs yet to be banned for it

 

[V-Temp]

The ironic thing is I can't tell if Nintendo is doing it on purpose or by accident. You literally cannot predict what Nintendo will do. They are both evil geniuses and as dumb as a thumb.

All indication with switch security suggests intent and purpose.

 

[Draxzelex]

All indication with switch security suggests intent and purpose.

Reminds me of the 3DS banwaves that seemingly also had no pinpoint-able cause. Mayhaps Nintendo has been aware ever since the launch of the 3DS and is playing us all for fools.

 

[Der_Blockbuster]

Banned: N
If banned, provide proof (video preferred)
Downloaded with CDN: N
Cleared Error Logs prior to going Online with nx-dreport: N
Disabled "Send Error Information" in System Settings: N
SX OS used: N
SX OS used while online: N
Played online SX OS Backups: N
Layered FS Used: N
Layered FS Used while online: N
Played online Layered FS Injects: N
Homebrew/non-TX CFW Offline: N
Connect to Internet with homebrew/CFW: N
Connect to eShop while using CFW/homebrew: N
Played with Layered FS Injects with Own Cert.: N
Can you access the eShop: Y
Backups updated: N
Wi-Fi settings deleted: Y
Airplane mode: Y
AutoRCM: N
SX OS Version used when Online: N.A
Auto-Update Software: N

 

[V-Temp]

Reminds me of the 3DS banwaves that seemingly also had no pinpoint-able cause. Mayhaps Nintendo has been aware ever since the launch of the 3DS and is playing us all for fools.

No this is different. This hasn't stopped. 3DS came in batches. And was probably done with lots of strung together data as 3DS was hard to track.

This is an automated VAC with some randomness and thresholding, or at least all of the indications of one. It may still have some degree of verification before bans are handed out but this seems completely automated. It not hitting everyone is logical early on, they want to spook and discourage. They also don't want to make patterns or triggers obvious.

 

[lukhart]

Banned: N
If banned, provide proof (video preferred)
Downloaded with CDN: N
Cleared Error Logs prior to going Online with nx-dreport: N
Disabled "Send Error Information" in System Settings: N
SX OS used: N
SX OS used while online: N
Played online SX OS Backups: N
Layered FS Used: N
Layered FS Used while online: N
Played online Layered FS Injects: N
Homebrew/non-TX CFW Offline: N
Connect to Internet with homebrew/CFW: N
Connect to eShop while using CFW/homebrew: N
Played with Layered FS Injects with Own Cert.: N
Can you access the eShop: Y
Backups updated: N
Wi-Fi settings deleted: Y
Airplane mode: Y
AutoRCM: N
SX OS Version used when Online: N.A
Auto-Update Software: N

umm.. you haven't done anything wrong, of course you'll not be banned