Cheat Engine Forum Index Cheat Engine
The Official Site of Cheat Engine
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


[CrackMe]Easy crackme
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cheat Engine Forum Index -> General programming -> Crackmes
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
killersamurai
Expert Cheater
Reputation: 0

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 197
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:04 pm    Post subject: [CrackMe]Easy crackme Reply with quote

First off, I'll go over the rules.
1. No Vb decompiler. You might be asking yourself why and I wouldn't blame you. But, it's not done in Vb. It's done in c++ using win32 api Very Happy.
2. If you feel like not looking for this extremely easy password and decide to patch it, put your results in a text file instead of posting it for those who want to try it themselves. If you patch, it has to look as if you entered the correct password. If not, you fail. You can post the password, but not how you found it. That goes in a text file.
3. If you get the correct password, but fail to provide the steps and or the steps are incomplete, you fail.

With that said, this is kind of meant to be a test. For both me and you. I wont tell you what I'm looking for, that is up to you to decide. It might sound hard, but it's extremely easy. Just for fun, I'll provide a packed version of the program if you want to unpack it. It is packed with a registered version of asprotect.

In case you can't get it to run, you might need vc++ 9.0 runtime because it was compiled in visual studio 2008 pro. If any one wants the source, just ask and I'll give it to you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
atom0s
Moderator
Reputation: 198

Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 8516
Location: 127.0.0.1

PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doesn't run. I have the Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 Redistributable Package (x86) installed as well.
_________________
- Retired.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
killersamurai
Expert Cheater
Reputation: 0

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 197
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It opens and closes. There is a way to stop that........
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sponge
I'm a spammer
Reputation: 1

Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 6009

PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've managed to patch it. The only thing I found weird is you hard-code the serial. (No idea what it is in ASCII as of yet, i skimmed over the code.) Serial gets moved into the buffer in words, then crypted and then your input is crypted and compared.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
atom0s
Moderator
Reputation: 198

Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 8516
Location: 127.0.0.1

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

killersamurai wrote:
It opens and closes. There is a way to stop that........


Then its not really a crack me... its a patch me so I stay open then crack me. -.-;

_________________
- Retired.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
killersamurai
Expert Cheater
Reputation: 0

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 197
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 3:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There really is no need to patch it to make it stay open. *hint*In a sense, there are two passwords. You just need to find the correct way of entering the first one*hint*.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
haha01haha01
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
Reputation: 0

Joined: 15 Jun 2007
Posts: 1233
Location: http://www.SaviourFagFails.com/

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

doesnt run.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
killersamurai
Expert Cheater
Reputation: 0

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 197
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've attached the source to this crackme. Once you look at it, you'll see how easy it is to crack. It does run, but you'll have to look at the source to see why it doesn't run for you. You'll be able to do the first part by looking at the source, but the main password is encrypted.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
haha01haha01
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
Reputation: 0

Joined: 15 Jun 2007
Posts: 1233
Location: http://www.SaviourFagFails.com/

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

omg what a noob... he configured static address for all the api's... no wonder, it can only run on the specific windows build he has...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
killersamurai
Expert Cheater
Reputation: 0

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 197
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Uh, I just looked at the source... I'm not sure how to put this nicely but... it sucked? You're doing stupid things like calling static addresses. This crackme would fail to work under any architecture other than your specific one.

Furthermore, wrapper functions are pointless and frivolous. It seems like you're doing pointless things most of the time...


Yes, it was the address for my computer. But, this CrackMe wasn't really suppose to be a normal CrackMe and it was kind of a test. One of the things I was looking for was to see if someone had good analyzing skills. You will be able to see the window. Why? Because, I didn't hide ShowWindow() and I tested them on two other computers I own (both windowxp which is a little different from mine. My main computer is xp media center). If I did it the same as the others, then you would really think the thing never ran. The reason for those functions was to hide the apis from olly's search -> All Itermodular Calls. The only reason you see non-random numbers for the address was because I needed to test the functions to see if they worked.
Why? Because I wanted it to look like the real thing. As if you would see it if it wasn't hidden and functioned properly. That was another thing I was looking for. It was to see if someone knew their functions if they viewed it in olly. Even if it did nothing, you will still be able to find the password. This will lead to something else I was looking for. Someone who knew their way around olly.

I already know that it is a waste of time to do all this, but if I can waste a crackers time and make him/her stop looking for the password/serial/ a way to crack the program, I think I did my job. If I would of told you what I was looking for, it would of made your job, as a cracker, easier since you would kind of know what to expect and to look for.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't want you to think that this was totally pointless and there was no reasoning to what I did.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
haha01haha01
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
Reputation: 0

Joined: 15 Jun 2007
Posts: 1233
Location: http://www.SaviourFagFails.com/

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

killersamurai wrote:
Quote:
Uh, I just looked at the source... I'm not sure how to put this nicely but... it sucked? You're doing stupid things like calling static addresses. This crackme would fail to work under any architecture other than your specific one.

Furthermore, wrapper functions are pointless and frivolous. It seems like you're doing pointless things most of the time...


Yes, it was the address for my computer. But, this CrackMe wasn't really suppose to be a normal CrackMe and it was kind of a test. One of the things I was looking for was to see if someone had good analyzing skills. You will be able to see the window. Why? Because, I didn't hide ShowWindow() and I tested them on two other computers I own (both windowxp which is a little different from mine. My main computer is xp media center). If I did it the same as the others, then you would really think the thing never ran. The reason for those functions was to hide the apis from olly's search -> All Itermodular Calls. The only reason you see non-random numbers for the address was because I needed to test the functions to see if they worked.
Why? Because I wanted it to look like the real thing. As if you would see it if it wasn't hidden and functioned properly. That was another thing I was looking for. It was to see if someone knew their functions if they viewed it in olly. Even if it did nothing, you will still be able to find the password. This will lead to something else I was looking for. Someone who knew their way around olly.

I already know that it is a waste of time to do all this, but if I can waste a crackers time and make him/her stop looking for the password/serial/ a way to crack the program, I think I did my job. If I would of told you what I was looking for, it would of made your job, as a cracker, easier since you would kind of know what to expect and to look for.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't want you to think that this was totally pointless and there was no reasoning to what I did.


hey, focus here please, its a CRACKME. not a DEBUGME. a real software is useless if no1 can run it. what will u do when u will be a programmer? sell ur software and when ur customers complain it doesnt work u say "i only sold it for u so u can try to fix it"? well let me tell u something. computer using splits into 2. programmers and users. the programmer responsibility is to fix the source and make it work on EVERY computer. the users responsibility is to use the software without needing to fix it.


killersamurai, let me clear something. i hate you. for a long long time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Pseudo Xero
I post too much
Reputation: 0

Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 2607

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

haha01haha01 wrote:
killersamurai wrote:
Quote:
Uh, I just looked at the source... I'm not sure how to put this nicely but... it sucked? You're doing stupid things like calling static addresses. This crackme would fail to work under any architecture other than your specific one.

Furthermore, wrapper functions are pointless and frivolous. It seems like you're doing pointless things most of the time...


Yes, it was the address for my computer. But, this CrackMe wasn't really suppose to be a normal CrackMe and it was kind of a test. One of the things I was looking for was to see if someone had good analyzing skills. You will be able to see the window. Why? Because, I didn't hide ShowWindow() and I tested them on two other computers I own (both windowxp which is a little different from mine. My main computer is xp media center). If I did it the same as the others, then you would really think the thing never ran. The reason for those functions was to hide the apis from olly's search -> All Itermodular Calls. The only reason you see non-random numbers for the address was because I needed to test the functions to see if they worked.
Why? Because I wanted it to look like the real thing. As if you would see it if it wasn't hidden and functioned properly. That was another thing I was looking for. It was to see if someone knew their functions if they viewed it in olly. Even if it did nothing, you will still be able to find the password. This will lead to something else I was looking for. Someone who knew their way around olly.

I already know that it is a waste of time to do all this, but if I can waste a crackers time and make him/her stop looking for the password/serial/ a way to crack the program, I think I did my job. If I would of told you what I was looking for, it would of made your job, as a cracker, easier since you would kind of know what to expect and to look for.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't want you to think that this was totally pointless and there was no reasoning to what I did.


hey, focus here please, its a CRACKME. not a DEBUGME. a real software is useless if no1 can run it. what will u do when u will be a programmer? sell ur software and when ur customers complain it doesnt work u say "i only sold it for u so u can try to fix it"? well let me tell u something. computer using splits into 2. programmers and users. the programmer responsibility is to fix the source and make it work on EVERY computer. the users responsibility is to use the software without needing to fix it.


killersamurai, let me clear something. i hate you. for a long long time.

Comparing crackmes to commercial software is stupid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
killersamurai
Expert Cheater
Reputation: 0

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 197
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 4:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
hey, focus here please, its a CRACKME. not a DEBUGME. a real software is useless if no1 can run it. what will u do when u will be a programmer? sell ur software and when ur customers complain it doesnt work u say "i only sold it for u so u can try to fix it"? well let me tell u something. computer using splits into 2. programmers and users. the programmer responsibility is to fix the source and make it work on EVERY computer. the users responsibility is to use the software without needing to fix it.


Bad choice to compare. It makes this argument unsound and can cause it to be invalid. Also, it would of been better to split up users and put programmers under it. I don't need to tell you why because I do believe you can think of the answer.

Technally, I really don't need to "fix" it. If the programmer knew what will happen and it was suppose to be that way, then there is no fix needed. If something the programmer was unaware of and it isn't suppose to be there, then it needs to be fixed.

As a person who reverse engineers, you give up the right to a fix if there is one needed. This as well, I'll let you think of the answer.

I do like to argue (not flame, it's is two different things) with people who A) Don't like me (they just say funny things when they lose thought) and B) It is a way to get people thinking. So, don't take things I say personally. It's a shame you don't like me, but don't let that get in the way of an argument or any sentence towards me. It just makes things peaceful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
haha01haha01
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
Reputation: 0

Joined: 15 Jun 2007
Posts: 1233
Location: http://www.SaviourFagFails.com/

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

killersamurai wrote:
Quote:
hey, focus here please, its a CRACKME. not a DEBUGME. a real software is useless if no1 can run it. what will u do when u will be a programmer? sell ur software and when ur customers complain it doesnt work u say "i only sold it for u so u can try to fix it"? well let me tell u something. computer using splits into 2. programmers and users. the programmer responsibility is to fix the source and make it work on EVERY computer. the users responsibility is to use the software without needing to fix it.


Bad choice to compare. It makes this argument unsound and can cause it to be invalid. Also, it would of been better to split up users and put programmers under it. I don't need to tell you why because I do believe you can think of the answer.

Technally, I really don't need to "fix" it. If the programmer knew what will happen and it was suppose to be that way, then there is no fix needed. If something the programmer was unaware of and it isn't suppose to be there, then it needs to be fixed.

As a person who reverse engineers, you give up the right to a fix if there is one needed. This as well, I'll let you think of the answer.

I do like to argue (not flame, it's is two different things) with people who A) Don't like me (they just say funny things when they lose thought) and B) It is a way to get people thinking. So, don't take things I say personally. It's a shame you don't like me, but don't let that get in the way of an argument or any sentence towards me. It just makes things peaceful.


well then, if the target of the software is to fix it, change the title to debugme, and put this in the debugme forums. this forum is for crackmes, not for debugmes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Symbol
I'm a spammer
Reputation: 0

Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 5094
Location: Israel.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No vb decompiler means we can't use notepad????? Sad

Can't run it, gives an error.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cheat Engine Forum Index -> General programming -> Crackmes All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

CE Wiki   IRC (#CEF)   Twitter
Third party websites