Hello, I've been trying to get Wabbitemu to load my unique calculator ID. I have a Ti-84 Plus C Silver Edition I have tried the rom8x but it gave me a PROD# of 01-1-10-01 or something, but it didn't give me the calculator ID. Since then I have been using Linky and dfu-util to dump the entire rom with my certificate, but I also used certdump from ( http://brandonw.net/calcstuff/84pcse/certdump.8xp ) to grab a copy of the certificate. I also did the same thing on the emulator, and it turns out that when both dumped certs I noticed that when I view them with CertEdit, I noticed this...



(Feel free to remove that if it violates anything...) (Left was done on a real calculator; Right was done online with jsTIfied) (Wabbitemu spits out a blank file.)

So... any way I can fix this?

Why do you need Wabbitemu to have your calculator ID?

I'm not really sure what might cause that, but it does look like the emulators don't correctly emulate the certificate. The special protections that the calculator hardware gives to the certificate are a bit obscure, and I'm not surprised that the emulators aren't perfect there.

Regardless, you can check the dumped ROM itself to see if the data in it matches the certificate dump files. Simply open the ROM file with a hex editor like XVI32 and seek to locations 1F8000 and 1FA000. (I can't tell you which, because the calculator alternates which has the active certificate whenever major changes to the certificate data are needed.) These two 8 K regions have the certificate data. The first byte will be a status byte, and then after that, one or both of them should have data matching the dumped certificate. You can similarly open the certificate dump file in a hex editor, but the dump will be prefixed with a bunch of header data specific to .8xv files. Anyway, you can then compare the data in the ROM versus the data in the dumps. If your ROM file certificate matches your certificate dump file, then you can blame an emulator for the discrepancy.

It looks like, for some reason, the first byte of the certificate shown on the right has been erased (flash erases to FF, not 00.) I don't understand why this would be the case (but I'm not an expert on the certificate). But the weird thing here is that the date stamps in the two files are different. That explains why the subsequent signature field is also different. But I don't understand how not only could the date stamps be different, but how or why something would actually recompute the signature of the date stamp.

Alright, I'll try that and see if I get any answers.