Print

[carlitoB]

QUOTE(Reaper527 @ Nov 16 2010, 09:40 PM)

then you should make your own firmware, and you can call it whatever you want.

it was a suggestion. head mod? wow.

also with the other one he asked where it said it on abgx360, NOT is it safe/correct. you are quite right though, NOT reliable.

This post has been edited by carlitoB: Nov 17 2010, 12:42 AM

[steveo1978]

Ok backups on Live is against Xbox Live ToS and are also against forum rules so I am gonna start handing out suspension for every one mentioning they are playing backups on live. I am gonna start watching every post very carefully and if I see anything related to pirated games The poster is gone for a while. I dont know way hat every time Xbox-Scene makes a post people think the forum rules dont apply to that thread. I might even go back through this thread and start suspended people that have already broke the rules.

[lrod2344]

QUOTE(astr4twin @ Nov 16 2010, 07:25 PM)

I take it your refering to having to reburn all your games to be safe on live?

I'm not bothered about playing on live so all my games ive burnt to date should play fine forever more unless a TU comes out for a game which had AP2.5 hidden in it? correct?

Another question i had was, again not bothered about live so am i ok burning NFS,AC:BH ect off now ready for when LT+ is released or are these going to require reburning with SSV3 or patched with SSV3 for burning?

Also a theory i have as to how M$ might force us to reburn all our games if they infact have had AP2.5 in them since Fifa 09 would be to bring out a new dash update containing TU for all games released activating AP2.5 checks. They could force people to update to it by future games not booting unless your on the latest dash.

Well thats what id do if i was a C*** (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Not entirely correct... case in point.... my friends console and NFS:

He was FORCED to update the dash from the disc in order to USE the game... once he updated only THEN was he able to USE as NFS IS an AP25 Title.... now again being as how his was an ORIGINAL Samsung Drive AP25 was ignored because the drive isnt AP25 capable... had his drive been a BenQ or Lite-on which IS AP25 capable he wouldve A: NOT been able to USE the backup because the backup was NOT SSV3 Nor is his FW LT+ so he wouldve FAILED AP25 checks and B: his console (although already banned) wouldve been flagged for a possible future banning. Previous titles MAY have the AP25 Security layer pressed and laying dormat as it was suggested SO LONG AGO and all those titles needed was a wake up call from our friend the Fall 2010 Dash Update AKA Kinect Dash so those titles (who knows how many) will also need to be re-burned using SSV3.....So to Sum it up if you want to USE ANY AP25 games online or offliine you will need to re-burn your discs using SSV3 when it becomes available AAAAANNNNND have LT+ firmware. these are just my conclusions.... it can always change in the future. Sorry Steveo....saw your post last minute and changed my wording...

This post has been edited by lrod2344: Nov 17 2010, 01:02 AM

[rabarone]

My version of fable 3 does not have a ap25 in the abgx

Checking for updates to abgx360.dat...

* About to connect() to abgx360.net port 80 (#0)
*   Trying 69.73.174.253... * Timeout
* couldn't connect to host
* Closing connection #0

ERROR: couldn't connect to host
There seems to be a problem with the db so online functions have been dis
Try again later...

C:\Users\Ricardo\Downloads\Fable.III.XBOX360-MARVEL\mvl-fifi\mvl-fifi.dvd
id

Checking Game
     ISO: "C:\Users\Ricardo\Downloads\Fable.III.XBOX360-MARVEL\mvl-fifi\m
.iso"
     Size: 7838695424 bytes (SplitVid 3rd or 4th wave)
     Game partition offset: 0xFD90000
     Root sector: 75676 (0x1915E000), 2048 bytes
     default.xex sector: 1783936 (0xE99D0000), 20594688 bytes
     Files in ISO: 290, Folders in ISO: 112
     Total bytes used: 5975622079 (81.87%)
Game appears to have random padding

Checking default.xex
     Module Flags:          Title Module
     Image Flags:           XGD2 Media Only
                            64 KB Pages
     System Flags:          Uses Game Voice Channel
                            Pal50 Incompatible
     Title ID:              4D5308D6 (MS-2262)
     Ver / Base Ver:        v0.0.0.3 / v0.0.0.3
     Disc Number:           1 of 1
     Original PE Filename:  Fable2_xfr.exe
     Original PE Timestamp: 2010/09/10 18:19:25
     Allowed Media Types:   DVD-XGD2 (Xbox 360 original disc)
     Game Ratings:          ESRB:    M (Mature 17+)
                            PEGI:    16+
                            PEGI-FI: 15+

QUOTE(Reaper527 @ Nov 16 2010, 10:40 PM)

then you should make your own firmware, and you can call it whatever you want.
and like i said, it can tell you that a game has ap2.5, but it can't tell you that it doesn't.

if it says that a game has ap2.5, than it is obvious what that means. guess what though, it says fable 3 does NOT have ap2.5, and we all know that it does.

you can NOT look at one of those and be 100% sure a game isn't ap2.5. and to quote c4e
guess what abgx looks at (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[ROBJETS]

I did some testing.

Samsung 360 worked with AP 2.5 games with no problem

I have a Liteon and Benq console also.

I pulled the Samsung dvd drive out and spoofed it as a Benq and then a Liteon and proceded to place it in the Benq and Lteon consoles before updating the dashboard.

Neither the Benq or the Liteon consoles worked with Ap 2.5 games with the spoofed Samsung drive.


Im wondering where the info that spoofed Samsung drives are working because if this was actually the case my Samsung drive that works in the Samsung console would have at least worked in one of the other consoles but the fact that it worked in neither tells me that the spoofing info is wrong.

This post has been edited by ROBJETS: Nov 17 2010, 01:23 AM

[steveo1978]

QUOTE(rabarone @ Nov 16 2010, 07:17 PM)

     ISO: "C:\Users\Ricardo\Downloads\Fable.III.XBOX360-MARVEL\mvl-fifi\m
.iso"

Do you not read or did you think I was playing. You have the freaking pirate release group listed. BYE

This post has been edited by steveo1978: Nov 17 2010, 01:38 AM

[gaby04]

I have a question

I have a banned xbox with nxe dashboard. According to what i read you cannot play the ap 2.5 games that require the kinect update to be played. Is there anyway to patch backup copies of NFS:Pursuit (like remove the kinect update) to get it working on pre nxe

[Nombrrr1]

QUOTE(gaby04 @ Nov 16 2010, 05:10 PM)

I have a question

I have a banned xbox with nxe dashboard. According to what i read you cannot play the ap 2.5 games that require the kinect update to be played. Is there anyway to patch backup copies of NFS:Pursuit (like remove the kinect update) to get it working on pre nxe

look up Jtags

[aqswde123]

hi guys,

Im not trying to bring up the same old questions asked a million times just want your opinion.

AP2.5 games cannot be played on the new dash for obvious reasons and cannot be played on the old dash because they force an update to the new dash(except fable 3). I like the most of you will not play ap2.5 games until LT+ is out.

But for now is it better to say on the old dash or update to the kinect dash if I am not inserting an ap2.5 game into my drive. What would you guys do? Why would I want to update to new dash if Im not playing AP2.5 games? I really want the title update for F1 2010 it fixes a lot of bugs.

thanks

[toastynz]

Anyone know if NBA Jam is AP2.5? Ta

[BenieUK]

Thanks lrod2344 that really made it simple to understand (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

QUOTE(lrod2344 @ Nov 16 2010, 12:37 PM)

So This Is What Ive Found.... A quick goole did the trick.... looks like I was right AND wrong....

From the se7ensins forums:

Difference between a RETAIL game and a BACKUP (burned copy):

Retail discs include a security layer that a DVD burner cannot reproduce. When making a copy of the retail disc that security info can be read and stored but cannot be rewritten on the backup the same way it existed on the original retail disc. That is why you must have a modified firmware (flashed xbox) that will be able to read/respond to that security information even if it is not stored in the same way as an original retail disc. This is what SSv1 and SSv2 refer to, the way the backup stores the security info to be read by the flashed xbox drive.
AP25 and YOU:

First off, FIFA 09 is not an AP25 title. Currently the only AP25 titles are Fable 3 and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood.

What is AP25? Anti-Piracy 2.5 Simply put, its an updated security layer on both the disc and in the game files.
There is a lot of confusion on how AP25 actually works, many people just make something up or attempt to make it sound far more technical (scarier) than it really is.

Like the security system outlined above AP25 should work in the same way but with an added check. When you attempt to boot the game AP25 kicks in and asks the DVD drive to check some things on another security layer. If you have a backup of an AP25 title in the drive this check will fail because those security layers do not exist on the backup. Because AP25 is new, the current LT firmware does not have the ability to fake a response or look somewhere else for this security info if you are trying to play a backup copy. If you have the original retail disc in the drive the AP25 check will pass because the drive is able to location the security layer and return the proper response. When LT+ is released it should support this new security feature and be able to answer future AP25 checks without the retail disc. This is being referred to as SSv3 (our new fake security layer for backups).

**Ok, so without LT+ if I want to play an AP25 game like Fable 3 I need the retail disc?:

Yes.

What about the Nov. 1 Dash update? (Kinect Dash):

Dash update is safe. The only reason an old dashboard will not fail an AP25 check and the new dashboard will is old dashboards do not support the new security feature. Basically before the dashboard update on Nov.1 the 360 didn't look for AP25 because it didn't know it was supposed to. The new dashboard now has that support built in. Other than that, its just a dashboard update.

Why do people say Samsung and Hitachi drives are safe? Is my LiteOn/BenQ not safe?:

Some drives may be physically unable to read this new security layer (AP25 layer) and thus are considered "safe" from the new AP25 checks. LiteOn and BenQ drives are able to read this information and when asked by an AP25 title they will.

So, can I replace my 360's drive with a Samsung to be safe?

No. A drive is locked to the 360 it shipped with and cannot be swapped out. There is a method known as "spoofing"(copying some of the drive info to make the xbox think its the original) that will allow another drive to work. This is NOT a safe way to avoid AP25 checks. Even though the drive works, when an AP25 title asks for the check to be performed, your xbox will still "think" it has the original drive, so if it was a LiteOn or BenQ before then it will attempt to check even if it can't. If the check doesn't pass then your xbox will fail.

What happens if I fail an AP25 check?:

If you happen to fail and AP25 check for any reason your xbox will record this failure and your console will report back to MS that this check has failed. Currently it is believed Microsoft is collecting data for another ban wave using this information. Being flagged doesn't guarantee a ban, but MS is aware that your xbox did not pass.

I've also heard AP25 could be added to older games with a title update?! Is this true?:

Yes and No.
AP25 checks could only be added if the original disc had an AP25 security layer to begin with.

**If I fail an AP25 check will it prevent me from playing other backups?
No. When an AP25 title fails the test it does in fact return an unreadable/dirty disc error. Essentially, it is looking for something that cannot be found on the disc so the error comes back as unreadable/dirty disc. This is ONLY for the failed AP25 title and will ONLY happen on the backup. If you failed an AP25 check with say a Fable III backup, you can play with the retail disc just fine because when it looks for the AP25 information it will find it. Failing the AP25 check will not prevent other non-AP25 titles from playing nor will it prevent you from playing legit retail copies of the AP25 title even after failure. There is no corruption or dirty MS tricks involved with this, the backup disc you are attempting to play (AP25 title) really is unreadable since the AP25 data isn't there.

**Will the upcoming LT+ software fix my AP25 failure flag?

No. When LT+ is available and flashed on the console, even after a failed AP25 check, your backup AP25 title should then become readable as the drive can now look elsewhere for that stored AP25 response information. I do not expect the flag to be removed after flashing with LT+ due to the fact you can currently pass the AP25 check using a retail disc but the flag will remain if you failed the check prior. Think of the Xval(secdata) like the Windows Event Log. When an error occurs it records the error in the log for the Admin (in this case Microsoft / XBLive) to look at. What MS chooses to do with that information is still up in the air.

**As Jester pointed out in this thread, you can also write protect the NAND to prevent the xbox from being able to log security events such as failing the AP25 check. It will not bypass the check but if you were to fail the check it would not record the failure for future reporting to MS next time you are online. A guide for this will be added soon however it is recommended, unless you feel safe soldering things to the xbox motherboard, that you stick to double-checking your iso's before tossing the disc into the drive. If you xbox is already banned this may be of use to you as well.
If there are other general questions I missed please post them and I will attempt to answer them.
If any of the above info is incorrect and you have proof to support that I will be happy to edit this "FAQ" with the new information. Posting that you read somewhere or giving me a link to another forum is not proof but the reason I wrote this. Too much information is made up or misinterpreted causing more scare and panic than necessary. There are always going to be security improvements made, AP25 is just one of them. I only know how the system works on a basic level. I do not have any information on how AP25 request/reponse data is generated. It could be a general system (all games store the same values, the check just serves and a secondary check to the original check) as the ones before it or it could be a game-by-game basis (individual games have their own AP25 values). Do NOT post responses based only on what you have heard. If you have direct or personal knowledge on how these security systems work, feel free.

[danthaman673]

OMG! Once again this thread has been spammed with silly questions from ppl too lazy to do even the simplist of searches!! I have answered almost everything above MORE THAN ONCE!! I would ask everyon to not answer any more of these silly questions LET THEM LEARN HOW TO SEARCH! (Or  they are doing it deliberately ...) Anyway, Some ppl do have genuine questions comments, and I will re-iterate somethings again but pls all remember this L Don't feel like reading a 50-page thread for a small bit of info?? Then don't contribute to it being a 50-page thread with a small bit of info .. END RANT\

QUOTE(lrod2344 @ Nov 16 2010, 08:43 AM)

I have a question.... and understand I am by NO MEANS a newbie.... but this isa bit confusing even for me....

regarding the discs themselves....

If a disc (Black Ops) that was STORE BOUGHT is SSV2.... and somewhere down the line there is a title update from MS enabling AP25..... this update would be stored on the hard drive as there is NO WAY (as far as I know) for an UPDATE from MS to MODIFY a READ ONLY disc to now have SSV3 on the disc itself..... so if I then take that same disc and place it in a console that did not have this AP25 Update that disc would then revert back to its original SSV2 state.....

Sooooooooo........ wouldnt the same hold true for a Backup of the same game?

Isnt a disc that is SSV2 to begin with ALWAYS going to be SSV2?

Isnt AP25 a Challenge/Response system against the Drive?

Maybe Im missing something here.

what is the connection between SSV2, SSV3 and AP25?

And Finally Is the New ABGX a reliable AP25 check...Ive re-checked a few games and The SIMS 3 doesnt show as AP25 (as reported) Neither Does Black Ops but Fable III and NFS Hot Pursuit DO show as "AntiPiracy25 Media" ....Should we Assume that any iso that "Accesses Personally Identifiable Information PII" are AP25 aware/capable.... or are ALL titles AP25 aware/capable?

This was answered already AGAIN! (No-offence to Irod, I just picked his question because it was better phrased than the other noob-based ones) But pre-empting questions like this again:

(SS= Security Sector) SSv2 is a method for storing the SS info on the disc so if you have a retail with SSv2 then take it back to the shop and ask for the original. The new security sector is part of AP 2.5 and it doesn't have an official external name (their methods of stealth to take ppl by surprise - I think Xorloser coined it 'DVD-XGD 2.5 or something')  AFAIK. SSv3 doesn't exist yet.
AGBX CANNOT DETECT AP 2.5 PROTECTED DISCS! (If it show up then it just means that the xex will only run from the new media type (that has no 'xternal' name) and therfore will need xex patching before running on JTAG etc.. Fable 3's check is based on what dash it's running (IE; Media check only for pre 12611 and full AP 2.5 post 126111) Newer games will vary from this, Don't xpect M$ to make it easy ..

QUOTE(Smok3y666 @ Nov 16 2010, 11:26 PM)

If I run a game through abgx 1.0.3 (the new one) that detects AP 2.5 and it doesn't report AP 2.5 as being present does that mean that even with any future update the game will still remain okay? So, for example: Black Ops doesn't have AP 2.5, I update my dash and play online. Then M$ release an update but because it didn't have AP 2.5 originally it will still be okay to play online?

See above, As I have said MANY TIMES BEFORE: BlackOps is AP 2.5 capable!!<Confirmed> So if M$ put (or have already - is anyone checking??) into a TU the AP 2.5 check they could either silently flag you and/or bann/corrupted-bann/Prevent boot Any or all of the above

New FW will be needed to read the new security feature and more than likely it wont work on sammy/hitachis (for use as 0800 or otherwise) as it needs a special vendor command AFAIK

QUOTE(greedy_boy_3 @ Nov 16 2010, 11:38 PM)

I agree that the post a few above mine explains the situation pretty darn clearly and completely - well done.

Still, I don't understand how c4eva can be close to completing LT+, as we only know of about 3 discs that use AP2.5.  So somehow he has determined from a small sample of discs (and some XBOX Live traffic I guess) exactly how AP2.5 does and will work in the near future (one assumes).

I assume that LT+ essentially has a map which links locations on a pressed disc's new security layer to locations on an SSv3 backup (where the SSv3 data locations are determined by the ripping firmware).  Is this correct?

It was suggested a while back that AP2.5 might be impossible to combat due to an infinite number of possible challenges.  Could someone please explain/clarify this suggestion?  I understand that a challenge could ask for any piece of data from the new security layer, but I don't understand how it would ever be impossible to combat, assuming that this layer's data is burned to a backup disc (albeit on one of the regular two data layers on a DL DVDR) and a map exists (embedded within LT+) between pressed disc data locations and backup disc data locations.  Anyway, I assume that this isn't an actual problem as c4eva claims that LT+ beats AP2.5 period, or does he?

Any help would be appeciated,

H

Earlier Hakd FW uses stored responses, LT+ (by my best guess) will probably apply the same formula that would get applied in the normal (un-hakd) FW loop so it won't matter how many different challenges the dash puts out.

QUOTE(sidneysides @ Nov 17 2010, 12:57 AM)

So its not possible to even recover it on another console - it will still be corrupt on any other console?  Basically, your profile forever tied to that banned/flagged box?

No see 'uncrippling' (checkout 'Thwack's Tut - search those keywords)
If you are using con unflagger OR le fluffie then make sure you are using a virgin (unbanned) KeyVault (If you can) It will offer the best protection

ALSO: I am still recommending that ppl update with orignal FW in place (If possible) AND that ppl use their ORIGINALS untill LT+ comes out (It probably won't be as big a task as I originally predicted before C4eva made the more recent discoveries)

Brgds/Dan

PS: That se7en's post is a good all-in-one  (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)  description of the topic (even if half the info was probably gleaned from the previous thread  (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

This post has been edited by danthaman673: Nov 17 2010, 10:33 AM

[greedy_boy_3]

Say you have an AP2.5 ORIGINAL disc (e.g. Fable III ORIGINAL) and it is dirty/scratched in such a way that the AP2.5 check fails (i.e. the necessary data can't be read), what would happen?

[DeMoN_DARREN]

QUOTE(greedy_boy_3 @ Nov 17 2010, 04:19 PM)

Say you have an AP2.5 ORIGINAL disc (e.g. Fable III ORIGINAL) and it is dirty/scratched in such a way that the AP2.5 check fails (i.e. the necessary data can't be read), what would happen?

Someone shoot me down if I'm wrong (my programming knowledge is rusty of late), but any piece of code like this, and most code really, will have check bits or a check procedure built in to make sure that the returned value is correct/possible.  If the laser can't read the disc or gets bad data back, it will tell the program, "Hey, I'm not getting everything I want here, must be a bad disc (i.e. damaged)".  Thus the xbox will come up with the "dirty disc" notification.

It won't suddenly flag you as "naughty" if the disc is scratched.  MS would be stupid to not check its own checks.

This post has been edited by DeMoN_DARREN: Nov 17 2010, 04:39 PM

[greedy_boy_3]

QUOTE(DeMoN_DARREN @ Nov 17 2010, 05:37 PM)

Someone shoot me down if I'm wrong (my programming knowledge is rusty of late), but any piece of code like this, and most code really, will have check bits or a check procedure built in to make sure that the returned value is correct/possible.  If the laser can't read the disc or gets bad data back, it will tell the program, "Hey, I'm not getting everything I want here, must be a bad disc (i.e. damaged)".  Thus the xbox will come up with the "dirty disc" notification.

It won't suddenly flag you as "naughty" if the disc is scratched.  MS would be stupid to not check its own checks.

Yea you're probably right - although I still don't quite understand how the system could tell the difference between a bad read (due to scratch(es)) and simply receiving bad/incorrect data due to a messed up firmware/backup.  The thing is that from the user's point of view they will get a dirty-disc error regardless.  This in my opinion is poor on Microsoft's part.  If an AP2.5 check fails not because of a dirty disc, it still says 'dirty disc'.  Is that good programming?

This post has been edited by greedy_boy_3: Nov 17 2010, 06:29 PM