looking for Retron 5 hack to play Roms

Yup.. libretro is very plausible... just look at the filesizes:

libcore-gba.so (804 KB) - vba_next_libretro_android.so (811 KB)

libcore-snes.so (2185 KB) - snes9x_next_libretro_android.so (2180 KB)

libcore-genesis.so (1390 KB) - picodrive_libretro_android (1369 KB), so it could be PicoDrive instead of GENPlus?

libcore-gameboy.so (423 KB) - nothing similarly sized, but perhaps chromableed can compare it to gambatte source code

libcore-nes.so (489 KB) - again nothing similarly sized, so might be a third party plugin or something else

libretro .so files are in the armv7 apk here: http://www.libretro.com/index.php/downloads/

 

Yeah, if it has those two strings in it, then it's the libretro version of SNES9x Next.

Because those are two variable names I came up with - the exact same names in fact.

SFXSpeedupHack is a variable for SuperFX speed overclocking.

SpeedhackGameID is a game ID for games that rely on runtime speedhacks in the core to make them faster. Some of these were necessary to get some games to run at fullspeed on low-power systems like the Nintendo Wii.

I'd highly appreciate it if people start inspecting the Genesis and NES cores too.

If it's confirmed that the Genesis core is Picodrive, that would be another noncommercially licensed core (it's licensed under the MAME license even). So that would be at least two offenses on Hyperkin's part.

 

So I guess that solves the mystery.. Retron 5 is using an altered version of RetroArch... and I guess that any android device that is able to run RetroArch will be able to give an identical gameplay experience as the Retron 5..

Does RetroArch use skins? I guess it would be possible to replicate the Retron 5 skin and menu on another device by copying the necessary files?

As for a Retron 5 hack to play roms, one could simply run RetroArch on a rooted device...

I hope we can confirm the other cores yeah... There's no doubt about the SNES one, and little doubt about the GBA and Genesis ones.

 

The current version of RetroArch indeed does not have any skins, so it's possible they coded that themselves.

If they used the SNES9x Next core verbatim as a libretro core, then they had to write their own libretro frontend too (or just use RetroArch and modify it which given the tendency by this company to just copy-and-paste what is available from public sources without any accreditation or acknowledgement, seems more likely). We'd need to have proof of that being the case first though.

RetroArch is licensed under GPLv3 so it forbids TIVO-ization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoization

"Tivoization /ˈtiːvoʊɨˌzeɪʃən/ is the creation of a system that incorporates software under the terms of a copyleft software license (like the GPL), but uses hardware restrictions to prevent users from running modified versions of the software on that hardware."

So yeah, that would be another problem there.

 

Thanks for your findings!

It is really disgusting to see what is free and opensource, is warped with DRM and is sold for $$$. Classic Hyperkin.

 

I guess personally I wouldn't go this far... I write software for a living and sometimes you use open source without really being enough of a lawyer to know if you can abide by licence requirements in your specific situation... unless a lawyer wrote your licence, the terms you dictate as a software developer may not even be legally binding or enforceable frankly(the reason many people were excited about standardized licences which have been proven in courts)

I think under the broadest interpretation of "nor may they be used in a commercial product or activity"(gen licence) you basically have to create your own silicon and transistors to be able to use the product?

That being said I understand IP is a tricky issue... even I am in a grey area posting r5 root which includes hyperkin binaries(and I would not be overly surprised if they issue a takedown notice--which I would be obliged to comply with)

I guess I haven't thought much about DRM but I'm honestly not sure if encryption can really be considered DRM if you have everything needed to decrypt the package available publicly? feels more like obfuscation if anything(they surely could have made things more difficult for end users and locked down if they had wanted/needed--it only took me a few days after finding the recovery to obtain root)

What would be more interesting to me than name-calling would be if hyperkin released their sources and began contributing patches upstream.. I don't think technically they are charging for the software as much as the hardware(no charge for updates?) tho I am not familiar enough with the licenses involved to say if that makes a difference

edit: for one concrete example, look at https://github.com/libretro/vba-next/tree/master/src

some files are tagged GPL, some are tagged LGPL, most have no copyright info at all... so, which is it? afaik LGPL allows linking without having to release the source it is linked to, which GPL does not, do the files with no info exist in the public domain? who knows? due to the nature of libretro combining many disparate projects its pretty hard to even tell what licence things fall under in some cases

/rant

 

I have decrypted retron updater 2.0beta and other. and encrypted my own updater. My home app now load ROM from sd card and dump cartgidge to sd card. and edit game database. Please look at this movie. http://youtu.be/4sCejfVUu9k

 

@chromableed, so you wanna help out with identifying the other cores? or do you feel like you've already crossed a line..

I'm not out to nail Hyperkin.. I just wanna know what emulators and frontend they are using and how I could replicate the Retron 5 experience on a cheaper device (MK808B with same cpu is around 35 USD and RK3188 devices are around $50 USD).. This will allow use of ROMs out of the box and there are many cheap controller solutions on eBay (e.g. cheap usb clone controllers or USB convertor cables).

 

Eke (the author of Genesis Plus GX BTW - this might not have been apparent to you before but I feel it needs pointing out) already responded to an earlier weak rationale by you against releasing your sources:

"I wouldn't worry about coypright if I were you since if the above findings are true, it means that Hyperkin is, as suspected, selling emulator code that is under license forbidding commercial use (Snes9x and Genesis Plus GX)."

BTW, I made that SNES9x fork and I personally added the SuperFX overclocking code and the speedhack game patches (those strings referencing the variable names that activate/deactivate those portions of the code were all added by me personally, I know my own code thank you very much). Like SNES9x, it is noncommercially licensed. So you have two authors in here in this very thread who feel like their rights have been violated, and frankly your personal opinions on whether or not this is justified is totally without merit and totally unimportant.

We both believe that this kind of activity is wrong, and me and Ekeeke have already dealt in the past with another offender who went about his merry way profiting off the work of others and I personally saw to it that this activity was put to a stop based on the preponderance of evidence before me that this guy (Halsafar) was taking a noncommercially licensed core and profiting from it.

Frankly we are not interested in you backpeddling, concocting strawmen and making excuses for this company. Instead, we need to know more now about what else they have pilfered from others since we already have 'proof' of wrongdoing on their part with the SNES9x Next core. If their frontend is indeed based on RetroArch, then it's a violation of the GPLv3, as simple as that - on multiple counts, but most importantly, the TIVO-ization which the GPLv3 expressly forbids.

They are already in violation of SNES9x' noncommercial license by shipping noncommercially licensed cores with their 'commercial product', and if you don't respect the authors of the software that produced that and instead want to side with some company that wants to 'cash in' on a 'retro gaming craze', well, that betrays a lot about your ethics (or lack thereof).

So we need to know. Either you're going to produce the sources so that we can do more research ourselves, or you are going to side with an (already proven) immoral company that doesn't respect the licenses of the software it rips off for use in its commercial product (which the software expressly forbids BTW).

Also, bundling in conflicting licensed software is already illegal and would result in a GPL violation unless they included a GPL waiver and gave you a choice to expressly delete the non-GPL software. So, whichever way you slice or dice it, they are totally in the wrong here and frankly I don't want to listen to any more weak rationalizations on your part. Just you 'liking the product' is no rationale for excusing license violations on the part of the product maker.

 

Hi. Please don't attack me personally.

I stated my opinion and that's all. I am not a lawyer, nor am I claiming to be the rights holder to any of these things.

I do not have any "sources" so you are under false assumptions.

I do not work for hyperkin--this is not my battle. If you wanna attack someone, maybe you should talk to them instead of the guy who's helping you possibly identify a licence violation.

There's alot of things that are patently disgusting in this world--genocide, war, etc... in my humble opinion, licence violation does not rise to that level.

I don't think I ever said anything about my level of respect for you or any other open source author--I write gplv3 code on occasion myself. I'm not sure what attacking my ethics gains you other than trying to bully me into posting files I don't feel comfortable posting. You want the files: go buy a retron or ask someone to install my root image--no need to resort to ad hominem.

This is a false dichotomy(whether or not you agree with the assertion of moral implications). I believe with the root image I have given you the tools to assert your rights yourself--take it for what it's worth.

Thanks for your work on snex9x. (and thanks to Eke for his work on genesis)

Certainly not if all it means is I will be personally attacked by random people on the internet.

 

Yeah right, I'm going to fill the coffers of the same guys who are ripping me off just so that I can have even more proof they are ripping me off.

You could make a brilliant spokesperson for Hyperkin.

Now you want to tell me some good con story about being "afraid" of "legal repercussions" on the part of Hyperkin when these guys have shown zero regard for copyright law in the slightest by taking code that is not theirs and selling things that are not intended to be sold as per the license.

It's my "copyright" that is being violated here and that of SNES9x and possibly other cores. But I bet you don't give a shit about that. You only care about theirs. Hypocrite.

 

Why would anyone attack you for helping to uncover these things? The only reason for not doing this would be if you happen to be a Hyperkin fan/admirer and don't want to get them in any further trouble, in which case you're already doing the right thing by not posting the actual files. But since you already checked out a couple files, why not finish the job?

 

the same thing I wonder. Maybe you can have a chat with libretro?

well, that's not the ONLY possible reason. there is a thin dumb line in the consequences of 'copyright law' between posting anthers work(receive a take down notice) and circumventing a protection measure( https://www.chillingeffects.org/anticircumvention/faq.cgi#QID124 )

re: your second point--I looked in all the files, the things I noted previously were the only obviously identifiable strings(that I noticed anyway). If someone wants to direct me as how to further provide positive confirmation of the emulators in question I would probably be willing to look into it (though I really am hurt and offended by the many slanderous accusations about my character that have come up in this thread) but I don't have the game mentioned earlier.

 

They are not 'slander' or 'accusations' - you refuse to give us the means to investigate this ourselves and you just tell us 'go buy a Retron' when we already have evidence that they have used code that they shouldn't have. No doubt there is more. You refuse to cooperate with the people who actually invest the time and resources into creating a lot of these emulator ports, emulator forks and actual upstream emulator codebases and whose works are being pillaged by 'get-rich-quick' companies like Hyperkin that are surfing on this 'retro-gaming craze' hype to make themselves a quick buck.

We shouldn't be reliant on you to do this 'investigation' process. Send a PM and send the stuff over so we can actually do some inspections ourselves. And telling a guy whose fork (that was licensed under a noncommercial license) to 'go buy a Retron' if he wants to confirm this for himself is about the worst insult you could probably come up with since I (and probably other authors) have actually been made a victim of this company. So pretty please don't start playing the victim here where it's not due - send a PM, send the stuff over so that we can actually investigate this ourselves without relying on your 'word'.

 

Could you check the other .so files in hex editor plz and look for some strings? or you can compare them to the .so files in the armv7 apk here: http://www.libretro.com/index.php/downloads/

So the gba one should match vba_next_libretro_android.so closely and the genesis one picodrive_libretro_android.so

 

http://pastebin.com/Hb7myv0x

 

Is that from all .so files?

If I do 'find strings' with hex workshop on the picodrive one I find strings containing 'pico' and 'picodrive'.. and the vba one has 'vba' obviously.. I can't find those strings in that pastebin link.

 

are those strings from data or code? possible they ran it through an obfuscater if they are code(that is assuming it is the same code). also not totally unusual for people violating licenses to strip references to the original product name

... i guess i would say inconclusive at this point

 

Instead of just strings, you can try running something like readelf or nm to get better results, as those will find actual library symbols.

 

There are some strings at least from these files: https://code.google.com/p/genplus-gx/source/browse/trunk/source/cart_hw/cart_hw.c?r=354 + https://code.google.com/p/genplus-gx/source/browse/trunk/source/cart_hw/eeprom.c?r=581
Just wondering why the filesize is so close to picodrive_libretro_android.so when it's in fact genplus-gx.. or maybe picodrive has the same strings somewhere, but I can't find it on google.
Then again, the genplus-gx and picodrive cores are very similar size in the windows builds, so maybe it's just a different compile.

Also some stuff that seems to be related to FCE Ultra ("DiskDude" + "demiforce" + "EXNR").. maybe it's fceu-next, because the filesize is different from fceumm_libretro_android.so..

So the only one really confirmed so far is Snes9x-Next, but evidence is pointing towards GenplusGX +FCE Ultra/FCEU-Next + VBA-Next.. Hope that someone will eventually upload the full files, or maybe supply a download link to the actual application update on HyperKin's servers.