If your SD card is formatted as FAT32, the odds of data corruption from installing an NSP file is very low, and you're not really any better off mounting XCI files.
Atmosphere say that it avoids the telemetry that Nintendo does with your Switch, avoiding sending .logs of your behavior. I have never tested it because I installed incognito and lost the ProdInfo backup
Seems like some kind of stretch to me. I just won't buy SX OS for that single feature but considering that only SX users are complaining about the lack of XCI support on Atmosphere is a stretch to me. I think people who wouldn't have any use of it underestimate the number of people who would be glad to finally use it
There are, of course, people without SX OS who want XCI support on Atmosphere or ReiNX. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. However, the vast majority Atmosphere and ReiNX users could not care less, and this is backed up by some polls I did a long while back. With regard to the topic of people wanting XCI loading in Atmosphere or ReiNX, most of what I anecdotally see are SX OS users a.) wanting to make the switch from SX OS to Atmosphere, or b.) SX OS users who just want to parade their perception that SX OS is superior to Atmosphere. Also anecdotally, not a single person I've helped from scratch thought XCI loading was worth the price, and they all chose Atmosphere instead.
The quote below is correct. TX uses dumped copyrighted code from a real cart to trick the card reader into activating and mounting the XCI. Copying them would literally be distributing a pirated file. Also, don't debate with Lacius he doesn't actually debate he just twist words and uses semantics and straw man tactics to always come out on top of the argument, it's like talking to a Chinese Room.
My understanding is you can run unsigned XCI files using SX OS.
If you're going to spew nonsense about me, please have the courage to at least tag me. With regard to my comments about XCI files above, you're free to tell me what I got wrong, but I would rather do it over PM. I've said about all I have to say on the topic publicly.
That's a good point, and you're right, but my argument wasn't "Running XCI files can never be safe, so we shouldn't have an XCI loader on Atmosphere." I was specifically addressing the comments by @Rune with regard to the current state of NSP vs XCI safety. He claimed XCI files were safer than NSP files, not understanding how XCI files can run malicious code. I was merely acknowledging that using NSP files with a good installer is safer than running XCI files at present.
Hold on. Don't take what I said out of context and then call it "moving the goal posts".
So basically you're going to make up the rules of this comparison to suit your argument.
Well thanks for providing the only sensible and reasonable answer to the whole point of this topic/thread.
Send me a PM if you actually desire a response from me.Hold on. Don't take what I said out of context and then call it "moving the goal posts".
I said XCI is safer because you dont install them, where as with NSPs, you do. That is the distinction I used to call XCI safer.
You then gave me a reason for why an XCI can be unsafe (it being able to run malicious code like Pikabricker), yet this same reason also applies to unsigned NSPs. As a matter of fact, Pikabricker was actually distributed as a NSP and not a XCI.
You said that a "good installer" would check to see if your NSP is signed, even though its possible to manually check if a XCI is signed before running also. Sure the NSP's check is done for you which makes it more convenient. But we're talking about which is safer, not convenience. When you download your XCIs via a computer in the first place, its not really a big deal to have to check their signatures before transferring them to the HDD.
So you can take it out of context and call it "moving the goal posts", but I made it clear why I said what I said.
I said XCI's are safer because you dont install them. This isnt just about malicious code. One of the reasons I preferred the idea of mounting the XCIs is because NSP installations have been known to corrupt data on mSD cards occasionally. If I tried to install an NSP and my device randomly froze and crashed for some odd reason, I'm gonna worry a little, not knowing what caused it and what Im gonna be presented with when I reboot the device. I wont have this same worry when using XCIs.
Then later when I said XCIs and NSPs are as safe as each other, I said that in relation to when neither of them have signatures, which was only said once the subject of malicious code was brought up.
I didnt move any goal posts here. But you carry on misconstruing this and then being pedantic about it, while calling me disingenuous.
So basically you're going to make up the rules of this comparison to suit your argument.
You call NSPs safer just because the software verifies signatures for you, even though manually checking XCIs is a valid argument you dont want to accept.
You give a incomplete list of reasons why people shouldn't be installing unsigned NSPs but ignore the fact that this is still a hindrance and people will still do it anyway. (incomplete because you failed to mention having to install homebrew ports like AM2R as a unsigned NSP)
Why is it ok to create inconveniences like "dont use forwarders", "dont convert XCIs to NSP", etc, but the idea of manually verifying XCI signatures is too much to get on board with?
You're basically willing to jump through hoops to advocate for NSP usage but cant give the same privilege to XCI usage. It kinda "makes you come off as disingenuous".
Well thanks for providing the only sensible and reasonable answer to the whole point of this topic/thread.
And thanks for the advice. I just had to learn the hard way in the end.
Create or steal ?, at the end what is the point. If there was no .XCI upload, would they have created their own?
If you feel like you want to send me a response, then go ahead. I ain't asking or "desiring" anything.
It's not recommended, and any use of CFW carries with it a ban risk, but if you're only using Atmosphere and certain homebrew applications, particularly offline, one might consider that to be relatively safe
The context "installation" is only to extract and copy the files of a game to the internal memory or to the MicroSD. The real danger is in the execution of these files, without prior verification, so NSP is like having a key that ensures that it is a clean NSP and you are on the right track, even if you have installed previous updates, you will not be able to execute again the game if you do not have this update or higher.
The Real Jdbye
@
Skelletonike:
