symbian signed??

I have also been trying and getting the same error, UID restricted.. am I right in thinking the one person who can now sign tghis without a publisher ID (costing 200) is Samir (if he is registered with Symbian Signed)????

Does this mean mere users will not beable to use programs such as Rotateme etc....

I would appreciate any comments particulary if I have the wrong end of the stick..... hopefully

Thanks

I would also like to know,I asked my brother to sign a few apps for me...& so far I have recieved no emails from symbian signed (the signed sis file is supposed to be mailed to you)...I am not the only one...whats going on here...

Yes you'll only be able to sign stuff id you are the onwer of the UID. This is because it intended for developer testing not user distribution.

That said I would not be suprised if some developers release apps in the unprotected range.

The UIS is the unique identifier of an applications. It something that is specified within application code.

okay the only app that I manged to get from symbian signed today is shakeme...and it works great on my N95 8GB...really cool app...

rotateme & nokmote (both made by Samir) both had the UID error,shakeme did not(also by Samir)

So has Rafe said above I think its only of a matter of time for developers like Samir to relaese their apps outside the protected range.

surely now that you have the cer file for shakeme, cant you just sign the rest of the apps or did i miss something!!!!

norfi1983 you don't get a certificate from symbian signed online, you have to upload each application you want signed, and they give them back to you ready to install.

.... so is there any way to change the UID that is assigned to the app?

Yes, changing UID is simple, however it is not entirely ethical or in some cases legal.

How is it done?

Unsis the application, find all exe's and dll's, open each one in a hex editor and modify the epoc32 header to have the UID of your choosing, recalculate the CRC's for the header and the file itself, insert them in their respective locations within the epoc32 header, repackage, sign, and install.

It is a non-trivial process to learn, simple to do, though generally even just discussing it will have people smack your backside for 'talking about hacking'

dchky wrote:It is a non-trivial process to learn, simple to do.....

😮😮... thats gone right over my head... but thanks for the information anyway dchky... you seem to have alot of usefull information for me lately... thanks

hargs48 wrote:okay the only app that I manged to get from symbian signed today is shakeme...

I can conform that shakeme does work with the open signed online system.. works fine on my N95-1... nice app

so is this new open signed system no longer capable of giving you your own cert so you can sign any file you want on your pc? gosh that makes it so easy having your own cert.

Goodday dchky...I read your post about changing the UID from protected to unprotected.

I just have sum questions regarding it.I changed the hex values of rotateme to a more suitable uid field and changed all the files with this new file...I then repacked this into a new sis file and opened it in unsis pc app and the uid now shows a unprotected one...so thats good.

But now when I upload the file to symbian signed site I still get the same uid error with the same uid value (0x200087b5) could it be that the the .mif file is still giving the original value of the uid file to symbian signed site?

Any advice will be appreciate.Also I am doing this purely to sign all the good freeware apps,nothing more.

Thanks

Symbian is getting the UID's from headers throughout the sis file. No need to bother with the mif

The package file should also reflect the UIDs used throughout the application, as well as the installation paths, these ~should~ match the UID to be certain you wont have trouble at installation time, but you also need to look in each exe and dll and change the header information too. There are a bunch of apps in the SDK that can help with this, though largely these only make the header slightly easier to read.

Another thing you'll need to watch out for is the SID, I mostly just zero it out so that it takes on the value of UID3 by default.

Watch your CRC's pretty closely too.

A long time back I sent an email to the rotateme guy asking if he could change the UID, this is back when I'd messed with the swipolicy file on my N80 and had no clue what I was actually doing. The short answer was No, the slightly longer answer was WTF would you want to do that for anyway?

Now everyone wants it done for almost the same reason. (Signing problems) Go Figure. I wonder if he will change it this time round? 😊 Probably he will.

People People People

I think we are all loosing sight of the real problem here.

why should we mess about doing all this anyway!!!

could you imagine if microsoft asked you to email them all your software to make sure it ok, before it can install on xp.

sod symbian os

thank god Ive only got 2 month contract left on my N95-1. Windows mobile 6 here i come

dchky wrote:Symbian is getting the UID's from headers throughout the sis file. No need to bother with the mif

The package file should also reflect the UIDs used throughout the application, as well as the installation paths, these ~should~ match the UID to be certain you wont have trouble at installation time, but you also need to look in each exe and dll and change the header information too. There are a bunch of apps in the SDK that can help with this, though largely these only make the header slightly easier to read.

Another thing you'll need to watch out for is the SID, I mostly just zero it out so that it takes on the value of UID3 by default.

Watch your CRC's pretty closely too.

A long time back I sent an email to the rotateme guy asking if he could change the UID, this is back when I'd messed with the swipolicy file on my N80 and had no clue what I was actually doing. The short answer was No, the slightly longer answer was WTF would you want to do that for anyway?

Now everyone wants it done for almost the same reason. (Signing problems) Go Figure. I wonder if he will change it this time round? 😊 Probably he will.

Could you write some more about calculating the CRC's? I've found the UID's in the header and also used the uidcrc.exe to calculate the uid checksum but can't figure out where to get the so called header crc from, tried on the original file but they're not the same. I would really apreciate some help or maybe an example, I can give you a UID for fontrouter.dll and you could change it for me maybe?

The new UID should be 200136c6, if your're able to calculate the the checksums and write it to the file I would really appreciate this 😉

best regards

blesio

Hi Blesio, for it to work your UID's are going to have to be in the unprotected range: 0xA0000000 - 0xAFFFFFFF

Your UIDCRC if using 0x200136c6 will be 0x33714513, this is easily calculated.

The Header Checksum (0x14) is relatively straight forward, it's calculated using a CRC32 of the header itself, petran is handy for figuring out your offsets.

Hello...

i'm trying to change UID for rotateme too, but no luck.. can somebody explain more detaily how to do it?

i unsised the .sis file opened them in hex editor and what now?

thanks

I'm so glad I got the certificate before all this du da... :tongue:

There is one problem though, I don't want to upgrade to a new phone which I can't sign apps myself.

Be interesting to see how Symbian's refusal to issue new certificates affects the sale of Nokias.
A good percentage of N95 buyers are power-users - but if the cost of having to buy all their apps puts a new phone out of range, there will presumably, be some impact on sales.
As far as developers are concerned, they'll ALL have to release demo versions or expect very limited uptake.
If it turns out that sales of apps aren't increasing (or indeed, are even decreasing) as a result of Symbian's new certificate policy, it's difficult to see quite who will benefit other than Symbian selling a few certificates to bona fide developers.
Will those developers whose applications aren't that commercial stop writing if the kudos of having users running your cracked app is no longer there ?
Ultimately, I believe there will be a small rise in revenues for developers (at least, those at the more commercial end) but a big fall in the sale of new Nokia phones to power-users.
Quite what impact this will have on Nokia sales policy is hard to gauge, given that we don't know what percentage of buyers are power-users running cracked apps.
I'd hazard that it's around 25% - and that 80% of them are runnning cracked apps.
As a result of Symbian's new policy, there'll be a 35% reduction in sales amongst these users.
Net lost sales = 0.35 x 0.8 x 0.25 = 0.07 = 7% ... quite a significant dent in worldwide smartphone sales.
Will it impact the price of new models ?
Difficult to imagine it won't.
Watch this space.

I have modified the UIDs of the EPOC32 Header in their respective locations using http://www.antonypranata.com as references. My problem now is how to recalculate the CRC's for the header 0x14 and the file itself. Sir dchky can you please give some guides or examples on how to calculate CRC32 of the header including the file itself? 🙄

dchky wrote:Yes, changing UID is simple, however it is not entirely ethical or in some cases legal.

How is it done?

Unsis the application, find all exe's and dll's, open each one in a hex editor and modify the epoc32 header to have the UID of your choosing, recalculate the CRC's for the header and the file itself, insert them in their respective locations within the epoc32 header, repackage, sign, and install.

It is a non-trivial process to learn, simple to do, though generally even just discussing it will have people smack your backside for 'talking about hacking'

Is it pos for sum1 2 help me on this,,, its gon rite ova ma head n i have absolutly no idea on wt im doin at all,,,plz

ustahir_1 wrote:Is it pos for sum1 2 help me on this,,, its gon rite ova ma head n i have absolutly no idea on wt im doin at all,,,plz

If you don't understand the instructions then it's not really something you should be attempting.