Ban Solutions to Crackmes/Unpackmes by PM Only

[Sangavi]

I am referring to threads and posts like these:

If a solution is selectively provided only to the OP by PM then it defeats the whole purpose of the Crackme/Unpackme section. In such cases, the solution provider should not even be acknowledged unless they provide working steps for everyone to learn from.

This forum is a learning platform and if solution providers are expected to share the methodologies that they used for the solution.

Here is yet another thread where the posts from the solution providers who gave vague steps was approved:

Basically another thread containing "show-off" posts by the solution poster.

Nothing practical provided and no proper steps were shown.

I mean, take this for example (from this post): EXAMPLE 2

Quote

i fixed de4dot for new reactor including method decryption, cflow etc... and finally devirt it.
there are tutorials about fixing de4dot/devirt in this forum including this topic as well.

Basically useless. It's like saying that to climb the Himalayas one needs will-power, good training, a lof of good mountaineering tools, food packs etc and that one has to read up a lot of good manuals and practice on smaller mountains first...

Only posts in the Challenges section which detail proper steps which are actually reproducible should be approved by the mods.

OR... ALL POSTS there should be approved from anyone. Why just approve the "show-off" posts? Are we expected to "beg" the solution poster via PM for the steps?

I am quite sure that my post may get deleted, since any posts which speak the truth seem to get selective get deleted these days, but nevertheless I wanted to bring up this point!

Another example of an approved post where NO STEPS were provided:

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by Sangavi

[Teddy Rogers]

As I mentioned in the same topic the solution that was posted was light in detail and never approved. Had it been approved it would have been considered a show off post. I can't force people to post acceptable solutions and I can't stop them sharing them via PM.

Your other points are valid and I agree.

I would like to get your opinion, if someone posted a solution that they used tool a then tool b is that solution still acceptable?

Ted.

[Sangavi]

2 hours ago, Teddy Rogers said:

I can't stop them sharing them via PM.

Thanks @Teddy Rogers I agree with you but posts saying things like "He shared the solution with me via PM" and such should not be approved. That way, anyone would not be able to show-off that they solved it. If they want their post(s) to be featured on the Challenge threads as having solved something, then the requirement should strictly be that they should post a solution that anyone would be able to replicate. If any special tools are required, then unless they are willing to share the tools, their post should not be accepted.

That way, one would either have to post a proper solution along with the tools used or, if they do not want to share their tools, remain silent. I am sure that some would not want to share their tools but in that case they should not get the opportunity to make posts that just serve to boost their ego.

 

2 hours ago, Teddy Rogers said:

I would like to get your opinion, if someone posted a solution that they used tool a then tool b is that solution still acceptable?

If they are not willing to share their "private tools" that they used to arrive at the solution, then their solution (or even their post which just shows the final answer without the steps or tools) should not be approved at all.

Otherwise, one could just say that they used a "private tool" for every crackme/unpackme (when in reality, they just used public tools), in order to avoid detailing the steps. So, unless they are willing to share the "private tools", it does make their answer any more useful to the rest of us.

While we do not expect an essay or a full video tut of very detailed steps, a person with a reasonable knowledge of RE should be able to replicate the solution with the "steps" that they provide.

For example, just saying that they used DnSpy and IL Spy to solve it would be rather useless...

I would say that this is more like solving a trigonometry or an algebra problem back in high school where one is expected to provide the "steps" that they performed to arrive at the solution. One would be expected to provide just enough detail so that anyone reading it would be able to (reasonably) understand how to solve similar problem.

[kao]

4 hours ago, Teddy Rogers said:

if someone posted a solution that they used tool a then tool b is that solution still acceptable?

It's a really good question. The answer really depends.

 

Let me give you few recent examples.

Example #1: 

Extreme Coders names the tools and explains HOW to solve the crackme. A lot of effort is required but all the tools can be found via Google. So I have zero issues with the solution.

 

Example #2:

Prab names the tools but no explanation is given. "x86 retranslater" definitely cannot be found not on Google. "Clean control flow" tells the obvious thing but it doesn't explain HOW to do that.

What's the point of such solution? The only thing reader will learn from this is that he needs a magic wand that he can't have.

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by kao
for->from

[Washi]

2 hours ago, kao said:

What's the point of such solution? The only thing reader will learn from this is that he needs a magic wand that he can't have.

This is really the key point that probably should be the requirement for a post to be accepted.

A solution should be reproducible, not a list of private tools that are used. Private tools are, as their name implies, private, and by definition that means it is everything but reproducible (unless this tool is shared with the reader of the solution). The only person benefiting from such a reply is the respondent themselves in the form of an ego boost.  Not very productive if you'd ask me.

[BlackHat]

I was facing the Same thing from long time. 

Here I've raised my Voice - 

that It makes no sense to upload Cleaned file or saying that I used de4dot modded Private bla bla bla. 

Some People are like, Read the Assembly language or see de4dot or VM and you will know. Oh Ghosh does it make any sense? No there's a no sense of saying this. 

Consider, Someone ask me How to Decrypt the encrypted Password? So Should I answer him Remember the Table of 2 to 30 or learn Counting and Alphabet. 

It's make no sense. 

Mostly Comments are like "I use My Private Tools" "I used modded de4dot" I used  "Lamp of Aladdin" I used "Poseidon Trident 🔱" OH God, If You can't share or can't atleast explain little bit manual stuff, Then the Solution is utter nonsense and useless. 

I also think, We should allow solutions which actually are descriptive. 

 

 

 

[CodeExplorer]

Quote

I would like to get your opinion, if someone posted a solution that they used tool a then tool b is that solution still acceptable?

In my opinion that solution will be acceptable only if the tool used is public.
 

Edited June 12, 2020 by CodeExplorer

[CodeExplorer]

@@collins :

I don't understand what is to laugh off :-)  ☺️

[Sangavi]

4 hours ago, CodeExplorer said:

In my opinion that solution will be acceptable only if the tool used is public.

I think you mean that it should be acceptable only if the person is ready to share the "private" tool that he used to create the solution, with all of us (ie. make it public). If they intend to keep it private then they could just remain silent instead of just posting the final solution as a form of ego-boost to themselves.

I also totally agree with @BlackHat's post above.

 

[Kingmaker_oo7]

7 hours ago, Sangavi said:

I think you mean that it should be acceptable only if the person is ready to share the "private" tool that he used to create the solution, with all of us (ie. make it public). If they intend to keep it private then they could just remain silent instead of just posting the final solution as a form of ego-boost to themselves.

I also totally agree with @BlackHat's post above.

 

Bro i agree with your each word my full vote for you and also @BlackHat words also...

I need to tell one thing for all if past reverse they don't let some revering learning sufft then new reverse will never born..

 

Edited June 12, 2020 by VEL007

[Motoko]

It wouldn't surprise me that those who don't give descriptions and use "private tools"  are mimicking someone else's work,  then they are posting half baked solutions to try and look  good. 

I agree with a lot of the sentiments here. Show how you did it, post the tools you used, or just stay silent...

Also this is a community, hiding things from members of the community shows a total lack of respect for it and it's members, as far as I am concerned.

Edited June 19, 2020 by Motoko
Add more content

[Taitor]

See this post: https://forum.tuts4you.com/topic/42718-net-reactor-v6500-v2/?do=findComment&comment=206843

So now just solution without description of technique used is acceptable? How will we learn then? Such solution should not be approved, IMO.

[Teddy Rogers]

Likely to have been me overzealous hitting the approval button...

Ted.