Hacking [Pre-release, WIP] Yet another rxTools?

[Sizednochi]

Holy crap. rxTools returns!

Did it ever go away? I'm still using rxTools 3.0. It's what, 8 months old now. I see no reason to upgrade actually...

 

[duke_srg]

So... does it work faster than OG RxTools?

If you mean old rxTools, then this one is slighly faster in terms of decryption since hardware cryptography engine utilized more.

@nedron92: re-released preview build, now should work fine. I wonder why my EmuNAND had NCSD header in both places, looks like some software using it other way.

 

[VaiCorinthians]

happy to see this one :v
great!

 

[alex61194]

Did it ever go away? I'm still using rxTools 3.0. It's what, 8 months old now. I see no reason to upgrade actually...

lumas is the better cfw actually

 

[Sizednochi]

lumas is the better cfw actually

Care to explain why? I'm curious, I've been out of the loop

 

[cvskid]

*edit* -snip-

 

[astronautlevel]

Main thing that luma3ds does not have is booting into sysnand with signatures patched to be able to use F.B.I. on sysnand to install gba/dsiware games like you can with rxtools.

You can boot sysnand using Luma with sig patches.

 

[cvskid]

You can boot sysnand using Luma with sig patches.

My bad then, didn't realise that was the case.

 

[alex61194]

Main thing that luma3ds does not have is to boot into sysnand with signatures patched to be able to use F.B.I. on sysnand to install gba/dsiware games like you can with rxtools.

yes you can

 

[nedron92]

If you mean old rxTools, then this one is slighly faster in terms of decryption since hardware cryptography engine utilized more.

@nedron92: re-released preview build, now should work fine. I wonder why my EmuNAND had NCSD header in both places, looks like some software using it other way.

nice to hear, thanks.
I will try it today, when I'm at home.

 

[Trolling]

Care to explain why? I'm curious, I've been out of the loop

Luma is alive and RXTools is dead.
If you want more awesome features, switch now.

 

[pikatsu]

Luma is alive and RXTools is dead.
If you want more awesome features, switch now.

Ok, ok we will switch to RXTools

 

[duke_srg]

Yup, I understand. And, EmuNAND9 is using 4MB for the alignment. Keep in mind that we have only little control over where the FAT table and the actual data are stored (in the CTRNAND partition). We can only assume it is the same for all O3DS and the same for all N3DS. The FAT header itself is @0x0B95CA00 for O3DS and @0x0B95AE00 for N3DS. Also, when considering all this: I know existing standards - if they are just wrong - are a pain (see: how GW handles things, how EmuNAND Tool handles things), but I can't single handedly enforce a new one. The SD card MBR is the first step to make better (aligned) EmuNAND formats possible, but unless all major CFWs (Luma3DS, CakesFW and ReiNAND, too) support using the MBR for finding the EmuNAND, I won't change anything in EmuNAND9's default format options and the placement of the EmuNAND.

Checked the SD specs. SDHC alignment is fixed to 4MB, while for SDXC it is 16/32/64MB depending on the card size. The important part it that actual FAT data area should be aligned with that boundry. If we're not to slice NAND in parts and align every partition, we at least should align CTR FAT16 partition, but not the actual start at 0x0B930000 or FAT partition table start at 0x0B95CA00/0x0B95AE00. I suspect it most probably at 0x0B970000, if N have implemented any alignment in there. Need to check the partiotion boot record parameters @ 0x0B95CA00/0x0B95AE00.

 

[mariogamer]

I think that you work too hard... XD

No seriously...

 

[d0k3]

Checked the SD specs. SDHC alignment is fixed to 4MB, while for SDXC it is 16/32/64MB depending on the card size. The important part it that actual FAT data area should be aligned with that boundry. If we're not to slice NAND in parts and align every partition, we at least should align CTR FAT16 partition, but not the actual start at 0x0B930000 or FAT partition table start at 0x0B95CA00/0x0B95AE00. I suspect it most probably at 0x0B970000, if N have implemented any alignment in there. Need to check the partiotion boot record parameters @ 0x0B95CA00/0x0B95AE00.

Hmm... it is 16/32/64MB for SDXC cards, really? Can you point me to where this is written (I'm interested in the actual sizes). As for the NAND alignment... Right now, this will only be good to know, as the current major CFWS don't have MBR support for EmuNAND built in yet. At a later point, we may use this knowledge.

 

[pikatsu]

If this can help here some info
http://www.hjreggel.net/cardspeed/cs_calign.html
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/KernelArchived/Projects/FlashCardSurvey

 

[nedron92]

If you mean old rxTools, then this one is slighly faster in terms of decryption since hardware cryptography engine utilized more.

@nedron92: re-released preview build, now should work fine. I wonder why my EmuNAND had NCSD header in both places, looks like some software using it other way.

Now it shows all EmuNand options but it can't bott the Emunand (tried it more times). dammit.
The ifnromation (detection menu) is all okay, it recognite right firmware region etc. I don't try the other options yet like dump and so on.
From one fixed failure to the next?

 

[duke_srg]

Hmm... it is 16/32/64MB for SDXC cards, really? Can you point me to where this is written (I'm interested in the actual sizes). As for the NAND alignment... Right now, this will only be good to know, as the current major CFWS don't have MBR support for EmuNAND built in yet. At a later point, we may use this knowledge.

It's inside SD Card Specification Part 2 File System Specification Final V3.00. You can check my last commit, I gathered SD/HC/XC block and cluster specification. You could add that format an I could in rxTools so other CFWs ought to support this anyway

 

[duke_srg]

Now it shows all EmuNand options but it can't bott the Emunand (tried it more times). dammit.
The ifnromation (detection menu) is all okay, it recognite right firmware region etc. I don't try the other options yet like dump and so on.
From one fixed failure to the next?

What entry are you using? Spider works just perfect, while menuhax with boot menu false often. I did not alter CFW yet, so boot rate must be the same as with the original.

 

[brennerei]

I think I'm having the same problem as @nedron92. I decided to try out your version and set it all up. It got to the menu fine, but when I try to boot emunand, it freezes. Also using GW created emunand. My entry point is MSET, if it matters