PureBasic Forums - English

i have made an crackme, wich is utilizing encryption, its self modifying, special jumps and so on.. no one cracked it yet of course it can be done, however i have sent it to several people who havent done it yet..

For your system: Well. What about making a nice fake server for the program?

That would be too much. I would simply jump over all the checks

TheFool, Well, I just PM'ed you for a place to mail you the 'crack-me' you asked for. No, luck so far, and
Dagcrack doesn't seem too interested in picking up the glove either, so I'm going to go for this package.

thefool wrote:For your system: Well. What about making a nice fake server for the program?

That would be too much. I would simply jump over all the checks

Must admit I don't know all that much about cracking and stuff, but it would certanly be a nice way of learning, by trying to make a program that is hard to crack.

yeah it would..
2utopimania havent received your pm so i bumped in an adress

Ok, I uploaded the crackme and it's [url=http://www.utopiomania.com\gate\gatekeeper.htm]available here[/url] The password is crackme. Good luck, you'll need it... I hope...

where was it available?
after editing, i got the url to look like this: http://utopiomania.com/gate/gatekeeper.htm


got it. all the crackme does is write "protected with an unregistered version of execryptor" then nothing further happens!

It should be available if you click 'available here' ? After clicking OK on the dialog you mention, another one should open allowing
you to avaluate or enter a serial ??

utopiomania wrote:Hmm.. interesting since this package is quite expensive. If I mail you a 'crack me', can you crack it and return it to me...??
I'm pretty shure you can't....

I'm pretty sure I can shave your neck if you send it to me.
However You should be sure I don't have time for this crap and you should also be sure I'm not getting rid of a challenge I never accepted

thefool wrote:send a crackme to me plz ill have a look

Yeah he has nothing better to do

GeoTrail wrote:I had an idea of an anti-cracking system a while back. Not sure how secure it would be, but the idea is that the user MUST be online while starting the program. When the program starts, it checks a webserver for the programs md5 checksum, that procedure would be added several places inside the program, and if at any point the program couldn't read the checksum to compare with the exe itself, or if it couldn't get results from the procedures at any point in the program, it would kill itself. Well, just an idea. Haven't done anything with it, but it would be fun to work alittle with and then let people try to crack it, and fix it, and so on.

Well, bad since indeed most people has inet access.. but think about it, how about they are working on something and their net falls? if you'd be doing this checks from times to times its not something good.. or they arent connected by some reason or dont let the application access the net, or simply dont have inet.. they wont be able to use your program.

Also they could dummy your sever locally! just sniff sniff what the program sends and what it gets on result and dummy that!

thefool wrote:i have made an crackme, wich is utilizing encryption, its self modifying, special jumps and so on.. no one cracked it yet of course it can be done, however i have sent it to several people who havent done it yet..

For your system: Well. What about making a nice fake server for the program?

That would be too much. I would simply jump over all the checks

Doh, you should start by making your "crackme" public and advertised.
Then we see how long it lasts uncracked.

utopiomania wrote:TheFool, Well, I just PM'ed you for a place to mail you the 'crack-me' you asked for. No, luck so far, and
Dagcrack doesn't seem too interested in picking up the glove either, so I'm going to go for this package.

Picking up the glove? As if I was sniffing the forums every single second to see that!

But I already answered you. However I could PM you with some details I cant send you anything since we work in -spanish- here you wouldnt get crap of it, and a translator wouldnt help since we use lexics, apart from that I agreed with this friend to not share anything about this since he had a bad experience with this soft and he doesnt want to help it grow by informing the author about its vulnerabilities, instead he wants to exploit them further. I don't care I just tell you that its not as good as you might think it is.

It's like watching a couple of pictures of a gadget, you say "wow" when you finally order it and you got the package at home, you open it just to find out you spent lots of money on a piece of crap that doesnt even look as the photos nor work as advertised!. (not that it happens to me though before buying anything I try it out either from a friend or a shop).

So, "try it out" and crack it, if you're clever you'll find out how lame and insecure this "protection" is.

a hint would be, create a "crackme" and enter the valid data, find out the added key into the registry (Possible Hint: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SOFTWARE/) , export it. send the application among with the key to anyone and let them install the key into the registry, when they open the exe it will be registered. that is one of them. how can you find out this registry key? easy.. but wont tell you, I will tell you though that the data is NOT encrypted - therefore another lame part of "protection" from them... check it out, it might work if you know what I mean about all this, else dont come saying it doesnt work if you didnt do this simple task correctly. But.. I don't care, other methods involves jumping checks, etc. got 3 working methods here...

dagcrack wrote:Well, bad since indeed most people has inet access.. but think about it, how about they are working on something and their net falls? if you'd be doing this checks from times to times its not something good.. or they arent connected by some reason or dont let the application access the net, or simply dont have inet.. they wont be able to use your program.

Also they could dummy your sever locally! just sniff sniff what the program sends and what it gets on result and dummy that!

Yes I've already thought about that and have already found a pretty good solution for that, but offcourse, I won't reveal all my ideas. But, I will work on this project, think it would be a great project, even if it doesn't work as I hope, it would still be a great way of learning new things and also getting new ideas. Who knows, in 10 years it might be a great protection system

It might, all depends on how great your ideas are and how well you protect them

Dagcrack wrote:

However You should be sure I don't have time for this crap

This isn't crap to me or any other interested in this program. if it's easily crackable, or if there's any other serious
problems with it, it would have been quite helpful to get that confirmed.

Edit:
@GeoTrail, I had some ideas about protecting programs myselft, but gave up after sniffing around anticrack
sites and so on. It seems to be very difficult and time consuming to do even an ok job to protect an app,
and crackers generally advices people to leave it the pro's.

The idea seems to be to make cracking an app so much hard, confusing work for a cracker at a certain level
to give up.

I've seen examples where cracker groups have used a few months to crack a game. Before they succeeded, the
company had sold more copies than they expected, and sales where dropping fast before the crack was available,
so they beat the crackers and didn't care about the fact that it could be cracked at last.

As for ExeCryptor, the crackme I posted runs fine at home, but won't even start at work, nor on a single PC
running 98SE. On that it chrashes, and is closed down due to 'restrictions in force' on that computer. Does
anyone else have the same problems with the code??

utopiomania wrote:As for ExeCryptor, the crackme I posted runs fine at home, but won't even start at work, nor on a single PC
running 98SE. On that it chrashes, and is closed down due to 'restrictions in force' on that computer. Does
anyone else have the same problems with the code??

I get the same as TheFool, a message box pops up saying it is protected but the enter serial window never appears. No crashes though, not even with Win 98SE under VMWare but something didn't work correctly!

Ok, thanks! I checked on a third PC now, and the crackme doesn't work unless I install the execryptor demo on it. Stupid.

eww bad..

i will encourage you to look at this:
http://yodap.has.it/

AND this:
http://pespin.w.interia.pl/

yodap source awailable (this doesnt exactly mean, that there is an existing solution for it! and it does mean, that you can change it a bit yourself and therefore make a more unique protection so all the newbies out there wonders why they cant run the general unpacker on it because PeID sais that it is yodap and damn this is a long sentece!)


and thanks to dagcrack for the info abou the registry heh

I can send you the code posted earlier protected in the full version of execryptor if you're still interested in looking at it TheFool. Your opinion would be appreciated