812S@832S hack complete....:-D

vbimport

#1

Hi all,

Well, 812S@832S is a reality. The semantics of the hack are being worked on as we speak, with NicW lending me some coding knowledge. Yes, its going to be OK.

:bigsmile:

If somebody can provide the most current, up to date, RELEASABLE firmware for the 832S, I will gladly get to modding it…and in return, 812S@832S for all those that are keen.

:cool:

As a disclaimer, we really need to mention a couple of things here:

i) The fact that we KNOW there are subtle PUH/block/chipset differences that exist. Is the hack complete? We dont know yet. We need those who have access to dual layer media to help out in this quest…

ii) Once I have a NEW 832S f/w to work with - and the hack is made for that f/w, remember…flash @ your own risk. You all know the rules of engagement by now!

iii) We can confirm from Nic that in the test spinup of +R DL media, the drive detects and recognised the disc correctly. No burn has taken place as yet…more to come on this. Suffice to say, this is a VERY good sign.


#2

Not going to bite the hand that feeds him, says Nic… uh huh… right…


#3

Hrrrm, perhaps I should not have mentioned Nic in all of this.

Oooops.

All the same, he helps me out when it comes to some of the more difficult aspects of the coding work involved…

Long story short, Nic is the only person I know with +R DL media…so, logically, the guy is a good choice to help out. He agreed to help me out luckily…Hence, I need volunteer’s with 832S f/w…as Nic cannot give that to me.

Nic is always happy to help others out in these situations, he just wont play a completely active part in the hacking or distribution of the firmware itself…He is always happy to share coding knowledge for our community tho…:smiley:

Either way, its all looking on track and feasible, as OC-Freak has already shown us.

I just need new firmware to implement the hack methodology on now…:iagree:


#4

Nicely said Zebra :smiley:


#5

Originally posted by code65536

Not going to bite the hand that feeds him, says Nic… uh huh… right…
It’s so obvious that if Nic had done this, we wouldn’t have read zebra’s reguest as follows :
Originally posted by zebra

If somebody can provide the most current, up to date, RELEASABLE firmware for the 832S,
I will gladly get to modding it…


#6

Originally posted by BoSkin
It’s so obvious that if Nic had done this, we wouldn’t have read zebra’s reguest as follows :

Hmm, what about this…
:confused:

[i]originally posted by nicw [here](http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=575714) [/I]
I have also worked out a mod for the firmware which will not require
any eeprom changes. I wont release this publicly somebody else can, 
but if you want it just email me and I will send it to you.

#7

Hi Nicw

Can you send it to me also ronallan77@yahoo.de

Thx in advance
ronallan22


#8

Originally posted by pinto2

Hmm, what about this…
Yeah. Let’s just hope that zebra will finally figure it out where to get the FW, lol.


#9

Talk about mis-information!! Gee fellas give Zeb a break.

I never said I was going to hand out firmwares or crack tools or whatever, I do not do that.

I said I had worked out a mod for a firmware to make it possible without any eeprom changes, and I would send it to you. I also said I would not release it publicly but I changed my mind after recent events. So, to make it easier here it is below. If someone else wants to carry this further then off you go.

Depending on the firmware version the offset may move slightly but the search bytes should remain the same.

At or near offset 9EBDAh

look for hex bytes

6F 60 02 C3 22

and change to

6F D3 D3 D3 22

This will stop the orange flash situation when the firmware is flashed.

Enjoy


#10

@NicW

That looks the same as the 451@851 mod. If this is the case then the standard firmware patcher should do the job. Is this right?


#11

So there you all have it…

Go nuts…?


#12

All we need now is for somebody to send a copy of the 832’s firmware to dhc014… Please… :wink:


#13

So can I upgrade my Liteon 812S (US0F) to a working 832S? Where do I get the firmware?


#14

Originally posted by gvtest
So can I upgrade my Liteon 812S (US0F) to a working 832S? Where do I get the firmware?

Thats the problem, there is not a releasable firmware at the moment.


#15

But some already upgraded their drive… So why there’s no firmware? For legal reasons? Still beta testin?

Or are these posts another release of the old “look-a-here—what-I-have—attention-whoring-story” ?


#16

I do not have 832S firmware, but I feel that it would be best to post nothing at least until the drive is released. Come on… you probably don’t have double layer media yet anyways.

We better hope that Liteon/Sony doesn’t read this. We’ve taken advantage of their leniency for long enough and they will surely start taking further steps to prevent us from upgrading in the future. EEPROM checksums were just the first step.


#17

retracted


#18

Originally posted by code65536
[B]Just change 60 02 C3 to D3 D3 D3. Hey Nic, out of curiosity, do you even know what that does? :rolleyes:

So before people get so excited about this ingenious finding of Nic…

  1. The above simply disabled a subroutine in the firmware that checks to make sure that the EEPROM is the right EEPROM (i.e., a 832S EEPROM instead of a 812S EEPROM).
  2. Saying that this is the only change–just tweaking the firmware and leaving the EEPROM alone–means that the 812S and 832S EEPROMs are the same except in the way they identify themselves.
  3. In fact, this is hardly original. The 451@851, 812@851, etc., “mods” all work by just disabling the EEPROM check. Just what LDW851FP does. Just that terminal’s and c0deking’s hacked firmwares do.
  4. Oh, incidentally, this is what happened with the Polish mod for the 411. They killed the EEPROM check, didn’t bother to change anything else, and their mod failed miserably.
  5. Finally, if you really knew what you’re talking about, you’d KNOW that your method won’t work. It has already been said that EEPROM changes need to be made. And given the current prevalence of not tweaking the EEPROM unless necessary (like the 451@851 mods–if we can just disable, then go with it), why would it have been said that it’s necessary?

So folks, before you get too excited about Nic’s contribution, here’s a bit of him unmasked. Trying to steal the thunder by coming out with the Nic-inspired mod. Well, congratulations; you’ve just demonstrated that you really don’t know what you’re talking about. [/B]

To answer your question yes I know what it does, and I argue that it does not work, the failures afaik were caused by wrong eeproms being used, or vastly different eeprom values between models, in this case the eeproms values look to be the same, only checksums differnt. I have also just finished working out the checksum values and have it completed for the 812s and 832s drives. I updated the checksummer and tested it on a 812s -> 832s and it works fine. (DL burns excepted of course)

for those in the know, apply a standard 811s checksum algorithm calculation, then xor the final values from 100h, 105h, 10ah and 10fh with 0xF4, apply those changes to the eeprom.

To recalculate for a 812s, do the same but skip the xor as the checksum for 812s is identical to the 811s


#19

Originally posted by code65536
5) Finally, if you really knew what you’re talking about, you’d KNOW that your method won’t work. It has already been said that EEPROM changes need to be made. And given the current prevalence of not tweaking the EEPROM unless necessary (like the 451@851 mods–if we can just disable, then go with it), why would it have been said that it’s necessary?

It is necessary to change the EEPROM in order to convert an 812S into an 832S, that’s all that was meant by that. Removing the EEPROM check should be sufficient to make a 812S run like an 832S with modified 832S firmware, but it is necessary to fix the checksum to convert one drive to another in such a way that a modified firmware is not necessary. The mod should be similar to the 451S->851S mod in that no generic calibration data is necessary.

Many people are capable of coming up with the patch to remove the EEPROM check, and I honestly don’t know or care who the first one to do it was. I’m pretty sure that it wasn’t someone who got any credit for it though.


#20

retracts statement & shuts up :o