Log in

View Full Version : Emulator Release: VisualBoyAdvance-Cloud 1.0.0 (build: 300)



maxcv
May 22nd, 2009, 18:05
*************************

Squall Leonhart
May 25th, 2009, 17:42
Laterza(also known as skynet and maxcv) and his fake emulator project VBA-Cloud have crawled back out of their hole in the dirt to try to fool emulation sites once more.

Among a simple ResHack, he declares to have fixed numerous non existant bugs, in both emulation and the emulator itself.

However our lead dev mudlord has once again disproven his lies with a few tools he had laying about to provide us with this.



fraud
---------------

* no file changes in DLL, unlike what they said......
Scanning -> C:\Documents and Settings\****\Desktop\VisualBoyAdvance874\libpng13 .dll
File Type : Dll, Size : 60416 (0EC00h) Byte(s)
[Heuristics] -> Flag : 00000000000000000000001100100011
[!] File appears to have no protection or is using an unknown protection
- Scan Took : 0.984 Second(s)

Scanning -> C:\Documents and Settings\****\Desktop\[VBA-Cloud]emu100.b300\libpng13.dll
File Type : Dll, Size : 60416 (0EC00h) Byte(s)
[Heuristics] -> Flag : 00000000000000000000001100100011
[!] File appears to have no protection or is using an unknown protection
- Scan Took : 0.984 Second(s)

* Dubious resource hacks
* Its possible to create a patch that replicates changes.
- Normally the patch would be MUCH bigger if code was added..... A patch has been made to convert VBA-M into VBA-Cloud as well, further to confirm that VBA-Cloud is nothing but a hack.


Just given you all a heads up about this laterza/skynet/maxcv troll.



Here is the patch that Squall was talking about.


http://users.tpg.com.au/mudlord/things/patch.zip

Please go easy on the bandwidth.

Due to the nature of the tools used, patches that compare against code thats added or removed (which shows in a increase or decrease in file size), result in the patch's increase in size to cater for the changed executable.

So really, nothing added, nothing removed, just a res edit. Apply the patch on the latest VBAM windows compile to see.....

--mudlord.

Just to note, the VBA-M project hosts some big emulation names, such as DrNach from zsnes, Blaarg, and we have people like Exophase and Dwedit reporting bugs. If these guys can't find these bugs, then theres no way Laterza would even know of them.

PS.
Minish cap works fine in the latest VBA-M.

maxcv
May 28th, 2009, 01:30
What kind of lies are you talking about?

Squall Leonhart
May 28th, 2009, 17:55
stop pedelling your crap Laterza. :rolleyes:

mudlord
May 29th, 2009, 00:52
The one thing I find most ironic is........

We are aiming for a comprehensive VBA version, to solve all this forking, as well as trying to improve it. Ironically, what laterza is doing, is exacerbating the issue. Which makes no real sense.

If they had some logic, could they submit thier source to us? That way, we could both work towards the same end? Since....thats pretty much what they seem to be doing. And it makes zero sense to me whats happening now.

With what happened in the past though, with that whole fiasco, my trust is severely shaken. And now its worse. With what I seen, I don't know what to think anymore. :glare: This whole fiasco, again, does not make sense. If any dev had some honest things to improve something, wouldn't it be better to just help others too, that way they still do what they want? Because atm, it seems very much this is going nowhere honestly, no offense.


What kind of lies are you talking about?

I am going to respond very kindly, as I am into reverse engineering too, but at a much more specialised and low level........


Then, a group
called VBA-Cloud came and saw that VBA-M doesn't fix it the correct
way and decided to release fixes to the latest VBA-M releases, however
independently of VBA-M. So, VBA-M thinks that VBA-Cloud is just ripping
them off by copying their latest releases and doing actually nothing.
However, this is NOT true. The reason why VBA-M says those lies is because
they are not good at finding those fixes themselves.

1) What don't we fix correctly? Can you please point out to us our mistakes?
2) Well to be honest, empirical evidence does not lie. Its not subjective (I didn't just say "Hey, there ripping!", I used computing science and specialised tools to back up), I am trying my hardest not to take sides.
3) I think we are not lying, since we were established before. But things do seem, a bit odd.

I am being quite sane here, I really wouldn't like being trolled as a response, which does not make sense.

Besides, if a person truly rips....why don't they attack my stuff personally? I got loads of stuff that people might rip, since its stuff thats unique (like that Pokemon RTC fix tool). As well as my other productions I do elsewhere...wait, some other group does that too. And they do it to others as well.

mudlord
May 30th, 2009, 11:04
And as usual, Maxcv hides behind what they say. :glare:
All I ask is one answer to the things I said, and they dodge.

How *********** original.

maxcv
May 31st, 2009, 02:34
And as usual, Maxcv hides behind what they say. :glare:
All I ask is one answer to the things I said, and they dodge.

How *********** original.

The VBA-Cloud team will soon post the info regarding things to be fixed
in the blog: **************

You can always contribute too! We are not evil, just trying to fix bugs, etc.

Squall Leonhart
May 31st, 2009, 05:30
You morons can't find and fix anything,

for one, you can't even find the source code.
2. You lack the background of the DMG, AGB and CGB, and ARM7 documentation to even be capable of fixing things
and final, all that has been done is a res hack.

The only fixes that can be made to emulation are at code level, not compiled level :rolleyes:

Would a moderator close this thread already, Fake emulator and emulator hacks should not be tolerated on any site.

mudlord
May 31st, 2009, 09:01
Okay, I will contribute one thing.

There is no need for a custom encryptor/packer. They do not work. I say this from experience. Whatever this packer/protector is, it will fail. Everything has some vulnerability, even EXECryptor 2.4, which uses a very insane VM.

The one true way, is doing things on the code level. Even ASProtect with encrypt code markers/secure sections would work. Again, I would like to help you save your sanity. If people are capable of a open dialogue and where there is trust, then things can happen.