Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
71–80 of 302 posts
Re: Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
#72Re: Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
#73Many a crack back in the day was even more simple still, we'd just find and alter the right JE or JNE into a JMP and we're off to the races. As the author found, the tough part is just finding and interpreting where and how the protection was implemented. If throwing the exe in a hex editor gave you access to String Data References (not always the case, but more common than not) then you'd just fail the check you wer…
(I did go on to pay for the software)
Re: Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
#74Re: Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
#75Software companies love to milk enterprises for all their worth, because they're the entities who will pay the most amount of money if it means that the software they use can still work - and a big part of how they do this is via vendor lock-in. We can see in this article that this company was still using Windows 98 - they're clearly locked-in!
All of which is to say that this intellectual property might actually still be owned by a company who'll be able to sue.
If you haven't already checked whether the patent and other intellectual property is still owned by any company, OP, I would strongly suggest doing so first.
Re: Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
#76Re: Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
#77Yeah, Software protection was very naive in the beginning. Fun fact: I owned a windows 3.11 for workgroup UPGRADE disc collection, it was clearly explained and also enforced from the setup installer. So, no previous installed win 3.0 == upgrade installer will fail. The fix: just create an empty Textfile named win.com at any place - the installer simple scans the WHOLE disk just for this existing filename. Next fun fa…
I think he ended up pirating a 3.x install from a friend and running the upgrade on to of that; felt pretty morally clear given what the box had advertised.
Re: Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
#78It worked well enough and allowed the company to run until the founder retired and folded the business.
Re: Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
#79Why wasn't (isn't) this more widely used? It was clearly more effective than a cdkey. I know there is cost associated with the hardware, but surely the costumer can cough 15 more dollars. The only reason I can think of is wanting as wide adoption before max revenue as possible. But then, this has never been too popular, not even for games!
One problem is that they often couldn't be daisy chained, the connector on the back was only useful for an actual printer. So if everybody started doing it you would have to swap them constantly which is a headache. So they're mostly used for software where it's going to be the only thing running on the box. I find it interesting that they didn't make it into the USB era where you could easily have something that doe…
Re: Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle
#80Why wasn't (isn't) this more widely used? It was clearly more effective than a cdkey. I know there is cost associated with the hardware, but surely the costumer can cough 15 more dollars. The only reason I can think of is wanting as wide adoption before max revenue as possible. But then, this has never been too popular, not even for games!
Having to put a physical device on your parallel port at the back of the computer is kind of annoying, especially if every software you use has one. More common for games was to use the media itself for copy protection, using a variety of tricks to make copy more difficult. Other techniques involve printing some keys you have to enter using colors that don't render well in photocopies, or have you look at words a cer…
-- Only You Can Save Mankind, Terry Pratchett, 1992