[Usb Dongle Duplicator Software
Gildo Santiago
also i still use cubase 6 and i can see no way on Steinbergs website of buying an additional license as you can on say East wests website. Am i missing it? or would i have to literally buy a full version again?
Really, I did not think that was possible for the latest versions of Cubase. Do you have a license for Cubase on a Korg dongle (and Cubase is working properly) or some other software from Steinberg? Maybe a real old version of Cubase?
(Actually Korg latest software does not use it, they moved to a painfully slow overcomplicated online authorisation that currently is asking me to re-authorise every individual component of legacy collection after every reboot )
So, I do my work in the studio with the dongle, and then copy the projects to the laptop for playback. One thing you need to be aware of that I discovered a couple of weeks ago. Some features, like the ability to have a tempo or time signature track, are not available in AI, you have to use the full windows. However, if you save the project in AI, it turns those features off in the project forever, even if you open it back up in the full version. This behavior is by design, but the Steinberg guys have submitted an enhancement request to the developers to not permanently alter the project in this manner. That said, this is the way it works today, and I believe that applies to any unsupported feature.
I did this recently when my dongle maxed out at 200 licenses. I could not download new licenses to my default dongle when I tried to download a new license. I copied some redundant licenses from one dongle to a spare I had.
The first time I ever heard of a dongle was when it was used on a text processor called Wordcraft on the Commodore 8032. It was around 1980. We had three machines and had to share the dongle amongst us, which I thought was a pain so I had a look at the code.
There was a scrambled bit of code which got unscrambled whenever the system checked for the dongle. So all I did was unscramble it, set the return value to true, jump to the end of the routine and allow it to rescramble. Then I found out what checksum it came up with and patched that in. The printer module also had to be patched because it checked the checksum. It only took 5 days to work that out the first time round. The second time round, it took 2 hours.
About 2 months later, I saw an article in PC World that raving about how brilliant they were and how it would be an end to piracy. There was a similar article in a US publication. I wasn't exactly a top notch computer science graduate but it only took me five days part time. Did these reporters/computer experts even try bypassing the dongle or did they just copy each other?
The moral is, if you want to implement a secure system with a dongle, get a crap programmer to implement it because they won't just have one routine to do the security - they will have several, all written differently so a cracker like myself can't just go in and clobber one routine to bypass the dongle.
To curb piracy and as a "collateral side effect" also having more 16KB (e.g. 64KB for the game), Mikro-Gen Ltd launched the game Shadow of the Unicorn with an external 16KB (EP)ROM board that mapped on top of the internal ROM address space.
This game came with the Mikro-Plus interface, containing a 16K shadowROM and joystick port. The ROM image can be found in the 'Additionalmaterial' section below. Fraser Ross created a Shadow of the UnicornROM Loader for the +2A/+3, which loads this ROM into RAM, allowingplaying the game without the additional hardware device.
I once broke also a dongle protection in (very) early 90s for a DOS accounting program but it was rather simple... I debugged the (client) program to find out they just had a heavily protected interface module that hooked an interrupt, and upon called it set carry = 1 if the dongle was present, c=0 if not.
I did not even bother to look at the TSR encrypted code from the vendor, I just wrote a replacement TSR that returned carry = 1 and presto, did not even need to patch the actual program, just load my 30 bytes TSR instead of the dongle vendor before invoking it.
The oldest dongle like thing I own is a ROM board for the Apple II from 1978, where the whole PCB with all chips was cast in opaque thermoseting resin. This was ment to secure the software and disencurage any duplication.
But tieing Software to hardware to restict usage is much older than microcomputers. Unique identifiers for machines and/or CPUs where common with mainframes. For /370 for example the CPUID instruction (X'B202' - STIDPin early manuals) delivered a dword with a 16 bit machine type and a 24 bit serial number unique for each CPU.
So I have a wireless joystick and I've lost the USB Dongle that connect with the PC, My friend has the joystick as mine, is there any solution (software) to copy the driver of his dongle and put it in an old Dongle (Mouse)
On the other hand, it's possible that you can pair your mouse witha dongle of a second mouse, but there is no guarantee that it will work.You will just need to try. But you would need the driver that came withthe second mouse (although many dongles don't need a driver at all).
All the same the provisions of segment (a)(1)(A), someone UN agency has lawfully obtained the correct to use a duplicate of a computer virus might circumvent a technological live that effectively controls access to a selected.
Portion of that program for the only real purpose of distinguishing associate degreed analyzing those components of the program that are necessary to realize ability of an severally created computer program with alternative programs.
This site does not sell any cracked programs.
The purpose of this site was established to take backups of your dongles according to urgent needs.
Creating a patch for a software program or electronics product. Performing cryptanalysis on security systems that control access to digital data.
Copyright owner may request removal of this page. If a valid email is contacted, it will be removed within 24 hours.
Hi, I have a program which is called EasyPower, which to run it requires the USB dongle provided to be inside the computer, the issue is, I would like to do a backup of some type or a replication of the dongle in case the dongle stops working, any help will be kindly appreciated, thank you in advance.
I have developed a software piece (with C and Python) which I want to protect with dongle so that copying and reverse engineering becomes hard enough. My dongle device comes with an api which provides these:
What I can do in the source code so that it becomes harder to crack. Dongle provider suggested that, I should check proper dongle existence in a loop or after an event, or I should use the dongle memory in an efficient way. But how? I have no idea how crackers crack. Please shed some light. Thanks in advance.
First of all, realize that the dongle will only provide a little bit of an obstacle. Someone who knows what they're doing will just remove the call to the dongle and put in a 'true' for whatever result that was called. Everyone will tell you this. But there are roadblocks you can add!
I would find a key portion of your code, something that's difficult or hard to know, something that requires domain knowledge. Then put that knowledge onto the key. One example of this would be shader routines. Shader routines are text files that are sent to a graphics card to achieve particular effects; a very simple brightness/contrast filter would take less than 500 characters to implement, and you can store that in the user space on most dongles. Then you put that information on the key, and only use information from the key in order to show images. That way, if someone tries to just simply remove your dongle, all the images in your program will be blacked out. It would take someone either having a copy of your program, grabbing the text file from the key, and then modifying your program to include that text file, and then knowing that that particular file will be the 'right' way to display images. Particulars of implementation depend on your deployment platform. If you're running a program in WPF, for instance, you might be able to store a directx routine onto your key, and then load that routine from the key and apply the effect to all the images in your app. The cracker then has to be able to intercept that directx routine and apply it properly.
The best thing to do, though, is to put a domain specific function onto the dongle (such as the entire UID generation routine). Different manufacturers will have different capabilities in this regard.
How much of a roadblock will these clevernesses get you? Realistically, it depends on the popularity of your program. The more popular your program, the more likely someone will want to crack it, and will devote their time to doing so. In that scenario, you might have a few days if you're particularly good at dongle coding. If your program is not that popular (only a few hundred customers, say), then just the presence of a dongle could be deterrent enough without having to do anything clever.
Crackers will crack by sniffing the traffic between your app and the dongle and either disabling any code that tests for dongle presence or writing code to emulate the dongle (e.g. by replaying recorded traffic), whichever looks easier.
Obfuscation of the testing code, and many scattered pieces of code that perform tests in different ways, as well as separating spatially and temporally the effect of the test (disabling/degrading functionality, displaying a warning etc.) from the test itself make the former method harder.
795a8134c1