Exetools

Exetools (https://forum.exetools.com/index.php)
-   General Discussion (https://forum.exetools.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Binary patcher available? (https://forum.exetools.com/showthread.php?t=18732)

Stingered 03-31-2018 02:41

Binary patcher available?
 
I know of DUP2 and AT4RE, but I don't think these can do what I want. I want patcher to do a binary search/replace of a certain hex string. But needs to be able to search through older and FUTURE versions of the EXE, locate certain string and patch it, regardless of offset location due to recompile of same named EXE.

Thx!

Jupiter 03-31-2018 04:33

It's already implemented in dUP2, so you can use wildcards in patterns to mark bytes that are changed from version to version.

Stingered 03-31-2018 05:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jupiter (Post 112850)
It's already implemented in dUP2, so you can use wildcards in patterns to mark bytes that are changed from version to version.

Okay, cool. I will see if I can find how to do this. I was already looking into just writing my own as I could find nothing else. :D

[edit]
Indeed, this does work in DUP2 and solve my problem.

chicknsoup 03-31-2018 10:35

Give swiss knife a try?

https://sourceforge.net/projects/swissfileknife/?source=typ_redirect

dosprog 04-02-2018 10:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by chicknsoup (Post 112852)
Give swiss knife a try?
https://sourceforge.net/projects/swissfileknife/?source=typ_redirect

GSAR is good too.

LaDidi 04-05-2018 15:56

@Stingered:
As Jupiter said, it's already implemented in dUP2.
But, it's not a good idea to think that future version will be correctly supported.
Cause the signature searched will, maybe, exist elsewhere in the future version.
Regards.

Agmcz 04-05-2018 23:22

You can also use AT4RE Patcher with Search & Replace and wildcard support.

Stingered 04-06-2018 03:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaDidi (Post 112897)
@Stingered:
As Jupiter said, it's already implemented in dUP2.
But, it's not a good idea to think that future version will be correctly supported.
Cause the signature searched will, maybe, exist elsewhere in the future version.
Regards.

Very true, and not a perfect solution.

The best way, I have found, is to make the Search/Replace strings longer so there is less of a chance that you patch the wrong offset.

(for those that may not recall, wildcard = ?? and used as a place holder for non-matching string characters)

dosprog 04-06-2018 14:28

Many programs contain in the new versions both previous fragments [which are searched by the mask] and new ones added.
Therefore, you still have to make individual patches for a particular version, without searching with masks.

Stingered 04-07-2018 01:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by dosprog (Post 112912)
Many programs contain in the new versions both previous fragments [which are searched by the mask] and new ones added.
Therefore, you still have to make individual patches for a particular version, without searching with masks.

Hmmm... Something to remember.

dosprog 04-08-2018 12:14

I remember a few units of programs, which from version to version were patched by search&replace.
And there it was maked especially, imho.

In the simplest case the universal loader helps. Such as created with RPP v.1.5.1.006p [(c)2000-2018].
It's the script-based 32-bit loaders generator with search_&_replace and with selecting_of_file_to_load options.





All times are GMT +8. The time now is 07:35.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Always Your Best Friend: Aaron, JMI, ahmadmansoor, ZeNiX