Is there a homebrew app that adds funds to my 3ds Eshop

[ijustwannaplaywii]

And if so can I transfer these funds to my switch

 

[Hayato213]

No, eshop purchase are no longer available.

 

[Vexthewolf]

And if so can I transfer these funds to my switch

This would be impossible, even if you could the 3ds eshop has shut down a while ago, if you want switch games you can homebrew that but I can’t say how to get them…

 

[JohnnyD123]

There is no point at all. The Eshop is closed, you can pirate anything you could dream of, and you can just jailbreak your switch to pirate games on there.

 

[linuxares]

1) The eshop is shutdown
2) The funds were on the server side. Not on the client side.

 

[Kwyjor]

And if so can I transfer these funds to my switch

So... you're thinking there's a way to brazenly steal from Nintendo that Nintendo didn't bother to shut down as soon as people figured it out!?

 

[chrisrlink]

1) as stated above the 3ds eshop was shut down
2) thats something that fool Linus woould say on YYT (Hell he mutilated his STEAM deck installing a dang heatsink in it)) why not download ram for your 3ds for arceus sake)

 

[The Catboy]

Just pirate your games. Nintendo literally gives you no other options beyond piracy or gambling with second hand.
No, I won’t tell you where to get ROMs, that’s against the rules

 

[PacBunnyXV07]

And if so can I transfer these funds to my switch

...maybe companies should stop making games if this is how people are gonna act.

 

[E1ite007]

I want to think you're asking ironically...

 

[KleinesSinchen]

General answer beyond "3DS eShop is closed":

If you want something to be a little bit secure online, you must never trust the client!

There have been funny things, like some pizza ordering app, which processed payments locally. If you trust the client machine your security is as good as broken. Same for how FreeShop worked: The eShop relied on the clients (consoles) being honest and only asking for purchased content. Now 3DS eShop doesn't trust the client anymore and wants to see the cryptographic signature it created after purchase… creation relying on a private key the client does not have.

Funds on digital storefronts also must never rely on the client!

• Adding funds via credit card must rely on confirmation by the bank before actually increasing the number.
• Adding funds with a code relies on a trusted external machine (cash register in a shop) marking a given code as paid server side.
  • This is why you could steal 1000s of prepaid cards and have nothing but paper garbage → not paid means not activated server side.

So yes, we probably could have modified the local eShop app to show you have $200 (while the shop was functional). But it wouldn't have impressed the server and tricked it into issuing signatures (tickets) for you.

Besides: What you are asking for here is fraud. You will be in great trouble with the police if you choose to follow such roads.

 

[adamsyx]

Another title for this thread: “Is there a homebrew app to commit fraud?” anyways the eshop is closed + the funds are serversided so no homebrew app could do that, it’s possible to make it visual (clientsided) but that’s basically useless

 

[Ryccardo]

never trust the client!

Tell that to Nintendo for 90% of their online services...

So yes, we probably could have modified the local eShop app to show you have $200

Been there done that, with the SSL patch and an editing proxy like Paros or Fiddler, remember all Nintendo shops/zones/account settings/miiverse/wii settings are browsers with the spiritual equivalent of preinstalled ActiveX lol

$200 [...b]ut it wouldn't have impressed the server and tricked it

There actually is an effective way to increase credit and it's even official (EcDevTool), just that it only works on the developer test server

But it wouldn't have [...] tricked it into issuing signatures (tickets) for you.

True but for a different reason

What you are asking for here is fraud

This would actually be interesting to see in court - while some kind of product of service would be obtained in bad faith through "misrepresentation" or whatever, the victim wouldn't have lost anything either...

 

[masagrator]

Guy was thinking he cracked the matrix.

 

[KleinesSinchen]

This would actually be interesting to see in court - while some kind of product of service would be obtained in bad faith through "misrepresentation" or whatever, the victim wouldn't have lost anything either...

Juristic subtleties and semantics are hard. I could probably not even express it correctly in German.

First of all this part:

the victim wouldn't have lost anything either...

Following that argumentation something like copyright infringement and/or trademark violations doesn't exist. That argumentation will not stand the test in court.

The most fitting description in German I can come up with is "Erschleichen von Leistungen" (also used for using the bus/train without a valid ticket), for which the translator gives "obtaining services by fraud". It might not be the correct term a lawyer would choose, but for me it quite accurately describes the action of tricking a server into giving you more funds.
One wants to trick the victim (Nintendo) into delivering some content/service without paying, hoping they won't notice. That is the fraud part. The law that protects the victim's interests here is the copyright law, which doesn't need either physical loss (physical theft) or money removed from their account (digital theft).
Ignoring juristic subtleties, my laypersons interpretation is, that this idea contains two crimes: Copyright infringement and fraud... and this will have more severe consequences than only downloading games illegally.

Wait a minute: There even can be an actual loss of money. Nintendo must sent part of the income for each sold license of third-party games to the developers. When eShop creates licenses (tickets) for games they must pay accordingly... with money they didn't receive. Undoing such actions of case by case basis would be enormous effort, combined with the problem "two lawyers, three opinions": It might not even be possible/legal to demand money back from third parties after issuing licenses on their behalf.

True but for a different reason

What do you mean by that? Am I wrong for saying: "Locally modifying funds will not trick the server into thinking you have more money."? Ultimately the server must make the decision if it is accepting the request for a ticket -- based on the funds stored server side.

 

[Ryccardo]

Am I wrong for saying: "Locally modifying funds will not trick the server into thinking you have more money."?

No, but even if you had 100% real credit, they don't "sell" (create tickets server-side) anymore most titles

Which, btw, I suspect is for warranty reasons (something being available forever is a nice theoretical advantage of digital, but in the EU that means they, being the seller, have to support it forever + 2 years + possibly 4 more years in UK, where products must "last a reasonable time" practically capped to about 6 years for goods which should last indefinitely)!

 

[hippy dave]

Step 1) credit card fraud
Step 2) go to prison
Step 3) meet Bubba
Step 4) ????
Step 5) Profit!