New Software from DVDfab on downgrading UHD drives... Is this good?

[ccateni]

This could be a breakthrough or a rip off, so I decided to post the link here for this new project from DVDfab.
https://www.dvdfab.cn/uhd-drive-tool.ht ... n=content1
Currently for $109 on sale (and $209 with their UHD copy and ripper software for life apparently...), this software is supposed to "Downgrade the UHD-Unfriendly Firmware" and "Present You a Backup-Friendly UHD Drive".
I question this software, because I looked at "supported drives" and found this.

"UHD friendly drives:

LG WH14NS40 (internal, SVC code: NS50)
LG WH16NS40 (internal, SVC code: NS50)
LG BH16NS40 (internal, SVC code: NS50)
LG UH12NS40 (internal) Tested
LG BH16NS55 (internal) Tested
LG BH14NS58 (internal) Tested
LG BH16NS58 (internal)
LG WH16NS58 (internal) Tested
LG BE16NU50 (external, USB) Tested
ASUS BC-12B1ST a/b (internal, manufactured 2015+) Tested for a
ASUS BC-12D2HT (internal, manufactured 2015+) Tested
ASUS BW-16D1HT a/b (internal, manufactured 2015+) Tested
ASUS BW-16D1H-U (external, USB, manufactured 2015+)

UHD official drives:

LG WH16NS60 (internal, recommended) Tested

Note: This list will be constantly updated as we support more drives in the days to come."

This seems like the list that people on this forum and around the web found out with UHD friendly drives. Is it even worth $109 (or $209 for everything) if you can just get the drive like new, and have someone else downgrade the drive? Does it even work properly? Let me know down below.

[Billycar11]

No it has all the same requirements as the video I posted but you can do it on a 64 bit os I and others do this for much cheaper $25 I can sell you a drive preflashed shipped to you and cheaper than what they want just for the tool that most people will only use once.

[ccateni]

No it has all the same requirements as the video I posted but you can do it on a 64 bit os I and others do this for much cheaper $25 I can sell you a drive preflashed shipped to you and cheaper than what they want just for the tool that most people will only use once.

No kidding. I'm getting my drive flashed now by someone with a compatible pc, and it's still cheaper than buying the software and my drive (which would have been $170 at least if I went with the software). Maybe it works on PC's that can't flash the drive, but I'm not 100% sure if it works better than D.I.Y. or if it even works at all!

[mike admin]

While this post would obliviously sound biased, I would advise not to use this tool if you can afford to wait a little bit.

There are few reasons to this.

Firstly, this tool is essentially a clone of dosflash that operates in raw firmware writing mode (see viewtopic.php?f=16&t=18857) . This mode can very easy kill the drive if anything goes wrong.

Second, the ONLY way to correctly prepare a raw image for flashing in raw mode is by analyzing firmware self-update procedure and duplicating its behavior. The thing is that if you had gone this far - successfully reverse-engineered and understood the drive firmware self-update process, then it is trivial to prepare a proper "official" firmware image that can be flashed with official tools (as opposed to the last-resort SPI bus access with vendor IDE commands). The fact that someone releases a dosflash clone and not "official" update image, suggest that they really do not know what they are doing.

Third, the support for "unsupported" firmware versions is coming soon, in a way that would never require direct flash meddling process.

Just my 0.2 cents

[SamuriHL]

A question then if I may. Those of us that have flashed our drives with dosflash but have used that to extract the factory shipped firmware... We should be ok once we flash that original extracted firmware back to the drive right? Meaning what you said in the other thread about partially corrupt config data would then be overwritten by what was originally extracted... In theory correct?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[mike admin]

Those of us that have flashed our drives with dosflash but have used that to extract the factory shipped firmware... We should be ok once we flash that original extracted firmware back to the drive right?

Yes, if you have a proper flash dumped image (dumped with dosflash SPI access method).

However, if you have raw flash dump (dumped from drive memory) then the first 1KB of image is corrupted and has to be restored from drive bootloader image (which can be extracted from firmware update image). If you flash such dumped image without repairing it first, you will brick the drive for good, as it will destroy the primary bootloader.

Way to check with hex editor - if data in your image at offset 0 is equal to data at offset 0x10000 then you have a corrupted image.

[SamuriHL]

Yes, if you have a proper flash dumped image (dumped with dosflash SPI access method).

However, if you have raw flash dump (dumped from drive memory) then the first 1KB of image is corrupted and has to be restored from drive bootloader image (which can be extracted from firmware update image). If you flash such dumped image without repairing it first, you will brick the drive for good, as it will destroy the primary bootloader.

Way to check with hex editor - if data in your image at offset 0 is equal to data at offset 0x10000 then you have a corrupted image.

Thanks, Mike! Appreciate the information!!

[trdtac]

Those of us that have flashed our drives with dosflash but have used that to extract the factory shipped firmware... We should be ok once we flash that original extracted firmware back to the drive right?

Yes, if you have a proper flash dumped image (dumped with dosflash SPI access method).

However, if you have raw flash dump (dumped from drive memory) then the first 1KB of image is corrupted and has to be restored from drive bootloader image (which can be extracted from firmware update image). If you flash such dumped image without repairing it first, you will brick the drive for good, as it will destroy the primary bootloader.

Way to check with hex editor - if data in your image at offset 0 is equal to data at offset 0x10000 then you have a corrupted image.

I used dosflash32 v2.0 Build20110903 to "read flash" to save the original factory firmware and put it in a safe place. Is this the same as "dumped with dosflash SPI method?"
I followed the Billycar11 video method. Thank you.

[Billycar11]

I used dosflash32 v2.0 Build20110903 to "read flash" to save the original factory firmware and put it in a safe place. Is this the same as "dumped with dosflash SPI method?"
I followed the Billycar11 video method. Thank you.

i dont think our images are corrupt here is my saved image at the offsets it has different values but i might just be dumb.

0 offset


00010000 offset

[SamuriHL]

I agree with Billy. I did the same process and mine seems fine. I restored my original extracted image and I'm back to 1.01 just like out of the box.

[trdtac]

I just checked my original firmware. It has the same values. It is also a LG 1.01 factory firmware from a LG WH16NS60...Good to know it's valid! Thank you both!

[Billycar11]

I just checked my original firmware. It has the same values. It is also a LG 1.01 factory firmware from a LG WH16NS60...Good to know it's valid! Thank you both!

you mean the same values as mine or both offsets have the same data ?

[trdtac]

I just checked my original firmware. It has the same values. It is also a LG 1.01 factory firmware from a LG WH16NS60...Good to know it's valid! Thank you both!

you mean the same values as mine or both offsets have the same data ?

It has the same values as you, meaning in the hex editor program. Sorry about that..

[mike admin]

After much thought I've decided to release our version of "firmware downgrade tool" - viewtopic.php?f=16&t=18873