Questions/concerns about various SecuROM 4.8x titles & CloneCD

[Ratha]

Ive made images of various SecuROM 4.8x titles using clonecd versions 4.3.2.2, and the version just before Elby sold off to SlySoft, but i have a few questions.

I never make cdrs of my images. I dislike cds entirely thats why i image them so i never have to fiddle with finding them or swapping cds and waiting for cdrom drives to spin up and all that yay.

Anyway, with my Liteon LTR-52246S, seemingly every game ive ever copied that used securom 4.8 has worked perfectly from the image, however i was doing some reading and read that (some?) 4.8x needed Alcohol's DPM.

Am i mistaken that clonecd has made 1:1 copies of my previous games, as i dont think clonecd can record that information.

I have made copies of these titles which seem to work flawlessly with no emulation required, and i do not want to have to use any emulation, im looking to make 1:1 copies if? possible: (note copy protections are copied from your database)

Anno 1503 1.04 SecuROM 4.84.60 0079
Diablo II 1.10 SecuROM 4.85.07.0223 protected game.exe
Master Of Orion III SecuROM 4.84.50.0030 *** (this one required alcohol's DPM)
Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos (english) SecuROM 4.68.00.4608

And im also in the process of making a copy of:
Diablo II - Lord of Destruction Expansion 1.10 SecuROM 4.85.07.0171 protected game.exe

Anyway, i was reading the sticky in the copy protection forums about SecuROM 4.8 protection, and it made me question whether or not i should go back and re-image those cds with Alcohol, instead of clonecd, even though they seem to work flawlessly.

If anyone can provide any thoughts against this or to help alieviate my concerns any, i would thank you for doing so. I just want to make copies of what ive got without having to worry too much whether it wasnt done correctly or not, as i dont have time to sit down and play every game for hours to determine if its going to be okay. Seemingly, sofar, all the 4.8 games ive copied with clonecd (except master of orion 3) have worked fine, even after being patched.

Thanks you guys. Any help is more than appreciated.


Ratha

Last minute EDIT: It would also seem that Gothic 2 by what a friend tells me cannot be copied correctly by clonecd (with his "Lite-on combo SOHC-5232K"), but can be by Alcohol. If anyone could tell why this might be, it would certainly help my understanding of what needs to be done, changed, or approached differently.

If i should just switch to alcohol instead of clonecd for my own stuff or what. Im not overly fond of alcohol and all my previous images were taken in clonecd (minus master of orion 3) so id sure hate to switch over to a different format and whatnot. (would ruin my conformal database :P) Plus i think my demo copy of alcohol ran out lol.

I mean, at nearly 100 images now which are *supposed* to be 1:1 copies, learning that i screwed up by using clonecd would be a bit of a bummer, lots of time wasted if that were the case, but most of em play fine so.... im asking you cause i dont have a clue.

So id like an opinion from someone more experienced or opionated if at all possible. Thanks

[Copytrooper]

Almost all games you mentioned use older SecuROM versions based on subchannel data, this does NOT change with "modern" versions used in updates.
I think Gothic 2 uses newer SecuROM based on physical structure.

[LocutusofBorg]

Copytrooper is right, Gothic2 use newer Securom-Version with physical
structure-verification.

Everything have it's price, so maybe (you seem to use Alcohol alot) I will
suggest you to simple purchase it. Even Alcohol-Coders must eat something :mrgreen:

[Ratha]

Nah, i only used alcohol once, only use clonecd if i can get away with it as i dont care any for alcohol :P

But im confused..

You say that gothic 2 uses a new securom version with physical identification, but the version listed on your database is Gothic 2 SecuROM 4.83.52.0004. Almost every game i have copied has had a newer version than that and i havnt had any problems. If i had gothic 2 to test on id give it a shot, but i dont, and as you say it checks the physical structure.

Copytroopers post confused me a little bit there. (forgive my ignorance) but are there 2 different 'versions' of securom 4.8? And old one and a new one? I believe i read something about that awhile back but with as much as ive used alcohol and other programs (once and never) im 'slightly' ignorant of the different protections and whatnot.

EDIT: Or maybe the original disks have an older protection then what is listed in the database?

After all.. most everything i own and want to copy is like 5 years old.. lol.

So perhaps my question should be: How do i tell what 'version' of securom each version is using? Whether that be physical or subchannel or whatnot.

In truth i havnt actually used any protection scanners on my cds in a long time, maybe they are the answer to that? Since games i know that are supposed to be protected, most of the scanners ive tried cant detect any protections on, and the only program which does detect protections (clonyxxl) dosnt return much useful information. (or it detects two different types of protection on dual cd games) or things like that which just confuse me all entirely.

Most all the games i have are 3+ years old, so most of them dont have any 'serious' protection on them and this liteon drive i think can handle most of them. Or seemingly it has to this point with the use of clonecd.

If youve the time can you help clarify a little bit for me?

Thanks again.


Ratha

Oh and also, is there a place which has a database of up to date information on what copy protections can/have be defeated, and or how to defeat them and what programs to use to do so? As best i can remember most games can be imaged for 1:1, but there are some troubles writing disks back out. I have no interest in writing them.

[Ratha]

On a side note, im willing to do whatever it takes to make sure i have 1:1 images. If i have to buy and use a different program so be it. Since i dont have any interest in burning those images though, i just want to be able to run them with DT from my harddrive where possible.

That is, without having to worry any if my images are going to flake out when i get to the end of my game or go el-crap when i patch my game (not that i have much to worry about that since most of the companies who made my games are either out of business, or arnt patching anymore) If ya cant tell, im kindof odd about wanting to make sure things are perfect :P

The goal originally was to image every cd i had so that i could get them off my desk (and out of the reach of my 'friends') and put them away in boxes, but they do look kinda pretty in their cases.. got so many of em its causing the top shelf of my desk to bow a little more than im comfortable with heheh. Then i realized how much nicer games run from the harddrive, none of those famous pauses when inserting cds too.. none of that comp locked up for 3-10 seconds because you inserted a cd into your drive kind of thing.

Anyways, i really do appreciate the help, i dont know many people who do anything like this so its hard to really find anyone to talk to about these things who know anything about them.


Ratha

[Ratha]

Something else worth mentioning is that i copied my diablo 2 play cd, which supposedly uses securom new, with clonecd and it works just fine. Using same options on say master of orion 3, didnt work however.


Ratha

[Copytrooper]

There're indeed different versions of SecuROM v4.8x - the ones updating earlier versions (e.g. 4.6x from D2, WC3) and the ones 4.8x from the beginning (e.g. Gothic 2) - the difference is (as I already mentioned) that even updated versions like e.g. WC3 still check subchannels only, 'cause the original cd does not contain a special physical structure to be checked.
If you check the game database correctly, you'll see e.g. D2 even with update version 1.09d protected by SecuROM v4.62.x only (-> subchannel based), MoO3 protected by SecuROM v4.84.x (-> physical cd structure).

[bmschkerke]

If you want to be sure then I would recommend purchasing Alcohol and making your images using the DPMS measurements. Why? There is no reason why if your images are playing fine now. Why not? Because you don't want any problems later on.

I imaged everyone of my CDs using the maximum amount of information I could get, just so I wouldn't have to worry about it.

[,jACkdA\W]

the easiest way to check for the presence of physical signatures on a disk would IMHO be to try and get VSO's old BWA Builder (version 5.x is for registered users only), let it check the disk in question, and then just have a look at the results...