Skip to content

Comment on Keeping the Pirates at Bay – Copy and Crack Protection (2001)parent

Comments

It didn't seem to matter in this case. "I know YOTD was vulnerable because the copy protection was only run once, at boot time. I assume the crack bypassed the copy protection and then restored the data to its original state."

Doesn't the article also say they considered checking multiple times but decided against it to prevent too long load times?

The original comment was about the choice of checksum (CRC32), and a different algorithm might have made that harder if they had bothered to attack it.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.