I'm working on a hasp protected program ( MC 7.2 ) . I have the hasp.
I changed the trial dates and get an error " sim not initialized " does anyone know
what this means and how to fix this. I read Crackz tuts on hasp but I'm stuck on what
to do by having the hasp. MC 7.2 uses hasp 70.exe .I know this is easy but I'm stuck.
I thought by having the hasp, passwords and changing the expiring date etc I would be OK.
Anyway how do I initialize the hasp ?
Hiya.
OK, I apologise in advance, but I'm going to be harsh (I've already posted on the flames / humor forum in general response to this).
I'm sorry to say it seems apparent you did not seek to do any HASP research, like reading the HASP manuals which describes all of the HASP services in concise assembly language right down to the registers the parameters to hasp() are in.
Had you read the manuals and my document quite closely you would have discovered the only HASP that reads memory from the HASP dongle in MC is service 32h or ReadBlock(), had you read further you would know that only 2 types of block read are performed, had you read further still you would know which parts of that buffer control the time expiry, had you then read the HASP API guide and been slightly familiar with ASM you would perhaps know how to emulate this functionality.
Sorry, this is really harsh, but I don't believe you've done the required groundwork and this go's also for Sami's post on the Sentinel target (see the newbies forum, thanks +Tsehp for moving it there ;-) ).
Regards (and please take note of what I have said, note I've still provided you with the answer).
CrackZ.
GEE,....Just wanted to play with the hasp and had a question on an error message I overlooked in doc's I read .
By the way,.. patching all that code is a crude way to go. The program runs fine without a hasp or patching. ( hint : redirection ) Impossible you say, think again.
I have not run up against any program that was not a breeze,.. including what I see currently discussed now. If you bothered to look Crackz you may have noticed I haven't posted but a few times. When I do post a question it is stupid,..... I sometimes go blank at the obvious.
I wanted to share my knowledge and answer posts, but fear flaming. That and the fact my writing skills are poor,... You see CrackZ we all can't be gifted like you.
Your best talent though was judging me.
NOTE : this took me 45 min to write,................ but you knew that !!
Keep cool all of you, we're just trying to make here some simple guidelines, written now inside the new faq :
people get sometimes bashed on those forums, just because they did not made the minimum work : search the docs, essays (5000 here now !) everything and link what you've found to the precise question that you want to ask.
So the guy that brings you all the document needed to work on your projects can answer you fast and precisely.
And if people here find those questions as *easy level*, they will just be put on newbie's forum.
I'm sure you will all agree with this, otherwise we'll write a new faq ;-)
Hiya, /me places his diplomatic hat on.
OK, the reasons I was harsh with you.
1. Your error message is inside a disassembled listing of hasp70.exe in the clear, very easily cross referenced and easily understood (if you read the HASP guide or patched or whatever). I'm not clear even now whether you are actually claiming to have read the manuals.
2. If your cryptic hint to how you achieved something without a HASP or patching is meant to demonstrate how crude my suggestions are, I wonder somewhat about the wisdom of 1.
3. On this messageboard of 558 or whatever it is members I would dearly love to know everyone, dearly love to select their profiles, dearly love to know their level of expertise.....see where this is going, I don't have time to read and monitor and file and collate and internally digest every single post made my every single individual on 5 message boards.
4. Yes, I apologise for judging you, I am entirely prepared to accept your message board skills may not be indicative of your real life ones, thats why I wrote at the top it would be harsh, I'm fully prepared to accept my infallability of human nature, that I judge people by their posts.
+Tsehp, I'm not angry and I don't think your poster here is, just justifying what I think is pretty reasonable ;-).
To the poster : Once again, this isn't a flame, lets consider it good experience in diplomacy for both of us.
Regards
CrackZ.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks