Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: lm_checkout() retn

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Zman
    Guest

    Question lm_checkout() retn

    Hi all,

    Im working on a target that is using a popular license manager with a newer version v8.2a. It's got all that additional prikey/pubkey stuff as well. I've read most of the essays on the subject but the newer info seems to suggest that reversing this is difficult even for an expert. I found the checkout routine, but being a newbie, I cannot figure out where/how to patch the return value. Anyone else working on something like this? Any info or a push in the right direction would be appreciated.
    I promise that I have read the FAQ and tried to use the Search to answer my question.

  2. #2
    reknihT esreveR SiGiNT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Wherever I am
    Posts
    750

    ver. 8.2

    If you have an example lic. you can use that by applying, the ECC patch, do a google on that patch, or I can supply you with more details, in simple implementations just eliminating the _l_checkout or _lc_checkout call in conjunction with rhe ECC patch will eliminate the need for a lic.

    SiGiNT
    Unemployed old fart Geek - Self Employed Annoyance
    Team: Noobisco Crackers
    If someone can't do it for you, you'll never learn!

  3. #3
    Zman
    Guest

    Thumbs up

    Thank you signit33! I give that a try.

    -Zman.
    I promise that I have read the FAQ and tried to use the Search to answer my question.

  4. #4
    Zman
    Guest

    ECC LM Patched!

    All praise SiGiNT!

    The ECC patch in combination with the generic license and the NOP's place on the conditional jumps to the lm_checkout() worked like a champ! My first cracked program! Awesome! What a rush! SiGiNT is OBIWAN!

    Zman
    I promise that I have read the FAQ and tried to use the Search to answer my question.

  5. #5
    appleleafs
    Guest
    As I think that it is usually to risky to patch the l_checkout directly. Some program will checkout redudent features, or anti crack features, if the kind of feature is checked out, they will block some functions. Also, some program check for different feature to determine the current configuration, if every attemp is succeed, you may loose some function of the program.
    I think it is better to fix the ECC checking point, so that it fall back to the normal license check, and supply a valid old style license.
    I promise that I have read the FAQ and tried to use the Search to answer my question.

  6. #6
    reknihT esreveR SiGiNT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Wherever I am
    Posts
    750

    FlexLM

    Appleleafs,

    You are absolutely correct - the ECC should do the trick and that is where I pointed Zman for the first attempt, but I have had good success with the checkout patch on a couple of really simple implementations, it won't work with out problems when dealing with the more sophisticated apps, anyway it's always more fun to try to encrypt your own lic! Zman I truly appreciate the compliment, but I really don't deserve it, Flexlm is the only thing I know a small amount about ( I'm a 1 trick pony ) - and I was glad I could help you out, but the real work, (the ECC patch), was found by others and they desreve the credit.

    SiGiNT
    Last edited by SiGiNT; November 2nd, 2004 at 00:37.
    Unemployed old fart Geek - Self Employed Annoyance
    Team: Noobisco Crackers
    If someone can't do it for you, you'll never learn!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •