[2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

First hand news related to PrimoCache
WebProtectionIsCrap
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 12:52 am

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by WebProtectionIsCrap »

I hope they aren't stupid enough to ban me tbh. Reverse engineering always helped companies to get attention from new customers and draw attention to things in the code you just don't realize when you see the same code day for day.

I usually don't search for software if I can crack it on my own but I gonna give it a try for this one. ;)
People failed at the x64 version of the Ramdisk App for years now, atleast, I cannot seem to find a 64 bit version except my own which isn't anywhere else than on my HDD.
And just saying, same protection used for every program of the company, thus my SnR works for any application released as of today and ofc it also works with any Edition. Only small difference was the 5A which changed to 1E (90 Trial days = PrimoCache compared to 30 Trial days on Primo Ramdisk.

And ofc, I don't wanna have this stuff as a warez page, I can talk to the admin if the customer is a legit buyer first. Let's keep this as a rule. If it would be my intention to harm his business, I woulda straight uploaded and spreaded it into the web but I didn't. I am just here to help.
InquiringMind
Level SS
Level SS
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by InquiringMind »

WebProtectionIsCrap wrote:...Reverse engineering always helped companies to get attention from new customers and draw attention to things in the code you just don't realize when you see the same code day for day...
The problem with detailing how easy a product is to crack is that you risk encouraging the company to spend time developing more sophisticated measures.

That hurts customers in two ways - more aggressive protection increases the chance of conflicts with other software and the time spent on it delays the addition of more useful features.
WebProtectionIsCrap
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 12:52 am

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by WebProtectionIsCrap »

From what I've read, potential legit customers are butt hurt already because the application is/was to expensive on the one hand (and they changed the license price didn't they?) and they switched from offline activation to online licensing for the reason that the software got cracked. Now I am here to say, I did crack it in no time after they've spend time into "improving their licensing system" and it's a waste for legit customers to improve protection more instead of spending time in the actual development itself. It's just a waste of time and yet, only legit customers got harmed. That is the last point a developer is aiming for but nonetheless, it happened here.
If there is a will to crack this soft, there will be a crack available. If I am not doing it, someone else is going to do it. I don't even put it public. Harder protections making guys even more horny than easy ones.

All I was going to say where mainly three points:
- If you DID NOT YET BUY the application with the EXCUSE that you CANNOT ACTIVATE IT OFFLINE, I have a solution if the admin agrees.
- The online licensing check is shit at the current state and does not do what it is intended for, thus telling him (the developer) to rethink about doing offline activation available again for legit customers.
- Regardless of the protection, it will get cracked if there are people interested in doing it. Still, why would people buy it to support companies if they have the money? I could tell you a funny story of a developer offered a cracked version to a team after he saw how much people visited his site after they cracked an older version and released it but I better leave this.
Bjameson
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 12:00 pm

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by Bjameson »

Being a professional programmer, I enjoy trying out cracks and discovering what a bunch of losers crackers really are.

For example Primocache 0.9.9 Server edition, of which a cracked version can be downloaded. I found that this crack works for a while but miserably fails after a certain period of time. This goes for most cracks. They stop working after a while and the software drops dead.

Also, using a cracked version of Primocache can be quite tricky. For a programmer it's very easy to hide spy software inside a driver and make it unrecognizable by any existing malware scanner. Primocache's drivers by necessity have full and unrestricted access to the disks. There is no better place to hide spy software than inside an almost invisible disk driver.

As for myself, I don't need cracks. I can trick any program into behaving the way I want, and as long as I like. I'm not going to give away my tricks and I'm not actually using tricked software. For me it's a game, just to figure out how to trick fellow programmers. By doing so, I can see the risks of cracks. Those who underestimate the risk of cracks may find their bank accounts raided sooner or later. Or find their private documents on Google.

Therefore I most strongly advise against using cracked software. The best way to avoid having your software cracked is by making it affordable. Like Android apps. They usually cost so little that no-one bothers to even look for a cracked version. The result is profit from a cheap product with a high turnover.
InquiringMind
Level SS
Level SS
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by InquiringMind »

Bjameson wrote:...They stop working after a while and the software drops dead.
Sadly, this also applies to online activation - when the company cannot (or will not) continue to support their software. Users then lose out as hardware changes and upgrades prompt re-activation requests which cannot be fulfilled.

There are definitely security risks for cracks with certain sites supplying malware (easily spotted by the technically competent since they offer the same "crack" for any program and sometimes even offer 3 identical copies, labelled as crack, serial and keygen) and software using a driver or service (PrimoCache now uses both) has a greater ability to bypass security software.

However almost all malware requires Internet access to function, so using a decent third-party firewall to block network traffic from all programs except those that genuinely need it can prevent most problems. And "rolling your own" crack has fewer risks aside from falling foul of developer countermeasures.
WebProtectionIsCrap
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 12:52 am

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by WebProtectionIsCrap »

Being a professional programmer, I enjoy trying out cracks and discovering what a bunch of losers crackers really are. blabla[...]
Made my day. Especially the first part with comparison from "professional programmer" to "loser crackers". LMAO, gotta change my pants now. :lol:

Let's try to keep this talk a bit seriously atleast:
For example Primocache 0.9.9 Server edition, of which a cracked version can be downloaded. I found that this crack works for a while but miserably fails after a certain period of time. This goes for most cracks. They stop working after a while and the software drops dead.
Didn't checked that webcrap and aint speak for others but I tested my work over months, what should I say? It works. It's called cracking stuff properly.
Also, using a cracked version of Primocache can be quite tricky. For a programmer it's very easy to hide spy software inside a driver and make it unrecognizable by any existing malware scanner. Primocache's drivers by necessity have full and unrestricted access to the disks. There is no better place to hide spy software than inside an almost invisible disk driver.
I cracked it without touching the driver itself. Call it security flaw. Only changing a few bytes in the main exe was enough. Only bad thing can happen is that an application refuses to work, changes into an unstable state when touching it at the wrong place. Writing shit into your reg or files is possible with only little (but still noticeable) changes at the wrong place but the things you talk about requires alot more work (and skill).
And as a plus, just in case I need it at some point, tell me how to re-sign the patched drivers, teach me please professional programmer because I'm a nab, I don't know a way. ;)
Just don't use testsigning in your explanations if you don't mind, let's talk about legit stuff.
Those who underestimate the risk of cracks may find their bank accounts raided sooner or later. Or find their private documents on Google.
Not sure if your just trolling or retarded. When patching a few bytes of binary, how can you insert hidden backdoor shit/malicious code into it?
Teach me moah plis, you seem to be an incredible skilled ultra 1337 h4x0r baws. :mrgreen:
The best way to avoid having your software cracked is by making it affordable. Like Android apps. They usually cost so little that no-one bothers to even look for a cracked version.
Not getting cracked, because it's too cheap, aha. That's what she said (if you get the reference). ;)
There is no limit from "too cheap" or "too expensive" a cracker knows. Do what you want, what you can, regardless of protection and price. Some developers giving out free licenses if you decide not to release a crack but who gives a fuck? Didn't came across too much software I would use at all and I am not doing it for myself but for the people.

If you wanna buy it, the use of a crack isn't wrong by itself. Nobody can force you to use your license key on your computer. Even if you own a software legit, you just won't have the legit licenses on your computer for security or other whatsorever reasons sometimes. Or you just like the fact to be able to write something else into a registration window. The point where you say: There is a crack out, I buy it later but you don't, that's just wrong; using a third-party unlocking method isn't when you own it anyways since the devs got his cash already. Software worth downloading and using it cracked is worth buying.
Unless your poor and people who haven't the money to buy the soft won't harm anyone when using pirated copies. On the contrary, they might find and report bugs, making suggestions to the dev, help with translations if they can't pay but want to give something back.

Just want to clarify once again that I am not selling nor offering any cracked software here, neither for romex nor for other companies software. I just offer OFFLINE-activation for LEGIT customers as long as I get the confirmation by the admin.

@Inquiring, I see you can distinguish the legit cracks from the fake offers. Good to know you aren't that limited like the guy above.
Lemme know if you wanna give my work a try since you seem not too happy with the online-activation-system. ;)
minhgi
Level 10
Level 10
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 3:52 pm

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by minhgi »

@WebProtection

Can I try out your offline activation? I am a long time Romex user and have both a legitmate licenses for Primocache and PrimoRamdisk.
Bjameson
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 12:00 pm

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by Bjameson »

@WebProtectionIsCrap
Not sure if your just trolling or retarded. When patching a few bytes of binary, how can you insert hidden backdoor shit/malicious code into it?
Teach me moah plis, you seem to be an incredible skilled ultra 1337 h4x0r baws. :mrgreen:


In no way do I consider you stupid, Mr Mulavic. Quite the contrary. You are obviously highly intelligent, otherwise you could not crack. Your writing style shows that you are well educated. But you have a tiny problem. You think like a cracker, not like a criminal. You are not a malware writer. You are a cracker and your only goal is to deliver a clean crack. But criminals have only one single thing in mind. To install their spyware.

This is what happens in real life. Real people have heard about cracked software. So they use Google to find it. They download and install blindly. They neither know nor care what's inside the installer. People like that have no malware protection because if they did, it would have triggered long ago from all the crap they installed before. To alleviate the irritating scanner popups they don't remove the malware; instead, they uninstall the scanner.

Unlike you and me, real people don't run a binary comparison of the cracked copy against the real one. Let alone that they would understand what the modified code is doing. Yes, I can hide anything inside a cracked copy. Anything. Want Matlab or IDA inside PrimoCache? Easy. The limitations that you perceive do simply not exist. Your mistake is to assume that the cracked file size should match the original. It doesn't. Length- and CRC checks? NOP NOP EB XOR EAX etc.

Driver re-signing? What for? Why would you want to patch drivers? You simply spawn the original, unmodified trialware after installing your malware. The user will simply assume that the crack didn't work and searches Yahoo for another crack because the Google one didn't work.

Considering this scenario, don't you think malware is a real threat when installing cracked software? A threat not to you, but to the majority of Windows users?
InquiringMind
Level SS
Level SS
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by InquiringMind »

There seem to be some tangents developing in this thread...

Bjameson is right to point out the risks in searching online for cracks, especially for less technical users and malware itself can be tiny in size (many use a small "dropper" to connect to a pseudo-random URL for downloading the real nasty) - the SQL Slammer worm needed just 376 bytes for an extreme example. However, there are plenty of other methods of spreading malware including download hijacks so soon it may be necessary to warn against downloading generally. :(

On the other hand, Web (I'm gonna shorten your name since I'm a lazy typist...) is talking about DIY cracking, which shouldn't have such risks. But it does need proper testing to check against developer countermeasures (like rolling the system clock forward 100 years to trigger date-related checks, etc) to avoid situations like this and even then, 100% certainty is difficult to offer without full code disassembly. If Romex are capable of getting to grips with PAE after Microsoft gave up on it, they at least should be considered competent programmers who may like gaming crackers. :)

And thanks for the trial offer - but I'm holding out and hoping for an official "fix" from Romex. :)
stenrulz
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 3:48 am

Re: [2014-04-16] PrimoCache 1.0.1 released!

Post by stenrulz »

Sorry to get a little bit off topic but is there any ETA on the next release? It has been some time I would have expected at least a beta build by now. Also, what are the planned features for the next release?
Post Reply