Not really. There are plenty of people who have accidentally or on purpose played an .NSP game online and met with the error code 2124-4024 without a ban. This error code can be triggered without generating fake tickets as it just means the ticket is invalid which can be for a multitude of reasons. Lastly, Nintendo has no way of flagging users for games they don't own when compared to their Nintendo Account as this security is not present in their CDN server whatsoever hence why Freeshop was possible. If Nintendo could hypothetically flag users for playing .NSP games that aren't on their Nintendo Account, every single user with a .NSP game they don't own would immediately be banned.
The security is there, actually. It's just that as currently built it presumes titlekey+personal key encryption = ownership, as you can only gain the titlekey by buying the game. What it wasn't built for was that nVidia would fuck up and allow the titlekey to be shared and then tickets forged
They've made backend changes with relation to forged tickets for installation and FreeShop can proc an almost instant ban, but it's not robust.
They also know absolutely when you connect with forged/missing tickets (for install) of NSP titles, and even send this when requesting data. Why it doesn't auto ban is not something we can answer. Possibly to avoid weird false positives from an overtly draconian method.
Last edited by V-Temp,
If anything, Nintendo should have made eShop content require a valid Nintendo Account so it can check whether or not the user in question actually can make the request or not. Everything else are unsafe assumptions Nintendo made at their own cost and are now paying for it.
The mere thought that several people have the entire Switch CDN server saved somewhere is reason enough to implement such a check. I'd also like to bring up the fact that users were able to abuse CDN downloading for years on the 3DS with only proper security being now implemented. While Nintendo has certainly stepped up from those days, it is obviously not enough and speaks to Nintendo's incompetency.
No ones arguing that but me and many others have been playing online for months and have still not been banned for using xci files with injected certs. You can’t even connect with an nsp file.
The point I am trying to make is while they can now punish users for abusing their CDN downloading retroactively, arguably it would be better to prevent such abuse from happening in the first place. Whether that means delaying the Switch's release or taking down the servers for an extended amount of time, there is no reason that people should be able to download content they don't own.
Anyways, this is getting severely off-topic. This is all hypothetical and solutions that Nintendo may not ever implement until they release a new device.
Thanks guys for helping me answering my previous questions.
I do have one more however and I know that it might be slightly off-topic.
On a different forum I read that in combination with the SX-OS it is better to use FAT32 format on your SD-card rather than the newer ex-FAT because the latter one leads to 'data loss'.
Does this happen with homebrew only use or also with games not working as they should? I thought Nintendo fixed these faulty ex-FAT drivers with firmware 5.1.0 and everybody on this
firmware should be fine.
I do have one more however and I know that it might be slightly off-topic.
On a different forum I read that in combination with the SX-OS it is better to use FAT32 format on your SD-card rather than the newer ex-FAT because the latter one leads to 'data loss'.
Does this happen with homebrew only use or also with games not working as they should? I thought Nintendo fixed these faulty ex-FAT drivers with firmware 5.1.0 and everybody on this
firmware should be fine.
Sh*t, I upgraded from 1.6 and now my Switch won't boot up. I have autoRCM installed but I'm sure my battery was at least 80%. I will definitely remove autoRCM once I fix this...
Similar threads
-
- Portal
-
-
@
Xdqwerty:
@Psionic Roshambo, checked the core list and there is no n64 core for that fork/version of retroarch+1 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
