Serious Sam II -> DT not blacklisted by SecuROM 7?

[Reef]

I just got Serious Sam II working without any extra anti blacklist tools or registry fixes. Image was made using Alcohol.

SecuROM 7.00.00.0172 detected -> E:\Program Files\Serious Sam 2\Bin\Sam2.exe

Did SecuROM gave up on blacklisting or is it some flaw/bug in the protection?

[NetSoerfer]

Interesting... Just to be sure, you do have optical IDE drives in your computer, and you're using Daemon Tools v3.47?

[YoMaN]

hm ill go and try that, if dtools 3.47 does not work, alc120% mount + sr7stop does work like a charm

[chaosuser]

crack is out guys someone wants to play in the internet with me so pm me

[yacbos]

well duded i made a mini image for serious sam 2 from the original dvd but it didnt work with daemon tools till i get this application called securom hide its only for securom 7 i put it and since then i play normaly with DT n no need to put my dvd each time
well the file name is SR7.Stopv1.0.exe its too small but its so handy its like anti blaxx and this progs but you dont need to patch it everytime

[Kinlaadare]

There is no need to let it run when you use a securom 7 protected software...

[Nikos]

Reef, you forgot to mention if you are using Daemon Tools or just Alcohol.

[ß]

that's not true!!!

seriuos sam 2 does not work with dt v3.47 and srstop...

it does not//

[noib]

Serious Sam works for me, with image created with Alcohol (latest build 1.9.5.3105), with DPM extraction.
I did not use the tools srstop and so on, i just used my fingers to apply the usual regedit tricks :
\Registry\Machine\SYSTEM\MountedDevices
\Registry\Machine\HARDWARE\DEVICEMAP\Scsi\Scsi Port X

[Sloopy_DE]

I just got Serious Sam II working without any extra anti blacklist tools or registry fixes. Image was made using Alcohol.

SecuROM 7.00.00.0172 detected -> E:\Program Files\Serious Sam 2\Bin\Sam2.exe

Did SecuROM gave up on blacklisting or is it some flaw/bug in the protection?

Hi,

not it's not a flaw, read this:

"The developers of commercial copy protection systems (in this case Securom, Sony; but this applies to all other copy protection systems (Safedisc, Starforce, ...) as well) give their customers (the publishers of the game) several possibilities to customize the protection they want to apply on their media (cd, dvd). It is possible to enable or disable several "parts" of the protection like some detection schemes to detect virtual drives, protection schemes for detection debuggers or even some to detect "anti-blacklist" tools.

Using this customizing the publisher of the game can make the protection "harder" but probably more costly in support, or they decide to make the protection more "soft" to keep their support efforts low.

Now to the version numbers: Securom 7.00.00.0109

The "7.00" is obviously the main version number, this will only raise if Sony develops a new major version with new features.

The ".00" behind that is probably a build number, which will raise if there are bug fix releases or something similar.

And the ".0109" is nothing else than a "release counter" or a unique identifier for this specific game. This counter is used by Sony to keep track of the different customizing settings the different publishers apply on their games.

So every game (FEAR, Serious Sam 2, ...) get a unique counter ID by which sony can find out how the protection on this game was customized ("hard" or "soft").

This is not part of the version number, so its useless to say "...0258 is newer than .0109, why is it weaker?"

Serious Sam 2 is customized very weak, it runs simply from an image on my system, without any "Anti-Blaxx", "SF Nightmare" or any other "Anti-Blacklist" at all.

FEAR is customized somewhat "harder" so it needs some of these measures to run...

To cut a long story short: The last part of the version number is only a "game identifier" and can not be used to put the different versions of Securom in an development order."

Sloopy_DE

[AnalCobra]

very interesting.
Thank you

[Reef]

Very interesting stuff, Sloopy_DE

But why do the people at SecuROM (and also other protection schemes) keep wasting time in blacklists? They know they can't win this 'war'.
It looks like they're so desperate that they have to use blacklisting as a last hope

I wonder what StarForce's next move will be, once they notice DT v4 beats their protection... If it's just new blacklists, then it means they're out of new ideas (and DT wins ).

[Sloopy_DE]

Very interesting stuff, Sloopy_DE

But why do the people at SecuROM (and also other protection schemes) keep wasting time in blacklists? They know they can't win this 'war'.
It looks like they're so desperate that they have to use blacklisting as a last hope

I wonder what StarForce's next move will be, once they notice DT v4 beats their protection... If it's just new blacklists, then it means they're out of new ideas (and DT wins ).

Well, time is a important factor in this "game". If they succeed in preventing a game being copied in the first three or four weeks after release, they win the most important part of the "war".

Today there is no way to get a copy of a securom protected game run from an image or from a copied cd without risking severe damage to your system (anti-blaxx and "look-alikes" tend to mess up your system). So today they are on the winning side if you look at it from the "mass market" perspective.

With DT4 this will swing over again to our side, who knows, but I'm sure of one thing: This will go back and forth again and again...... neverending story....

EDIT: Sure there is the way of using modified EXEs to run games, but this wasn't the topic here and is another story..... different battlefront so to say.

[zxctypo]

Thanks, Id been wondering about that...