Custom firmware build for R7800 v. 1.0.2.73SF

[tarassippo]

Rather impossible. No source codes even for stick 63. I deal with source codes.

https://kb.netgear.com/2649/NETGEAR-Open-Source-Code-for-Programmers-GPL

Voxel.

Actually it seems available: https://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GPL/R7800-V1.0.2.63_gpl_src.tar.bz2.zip

 

[kokishin]

Actually it seems available: https://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GPL/R7800-V1.0.2.63_gpl_src.tar.bz2.zip

And https://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GPL/R7800-V1.0.2.68_gpl_src.tar.bz2.zip

cc: @Voxel

 

[eliz82]

Is it possible to hijack GUI elements to change their functionality?

From what I saw that interface is mostly open source, they are some cgi files that are binary. You can check the files yourself, connect with WinSCP and see /www directory.
The problem is that you need to understand something like 4 programing languages to make changes: html, js (javascript), sh (shell) and cgi (some of them are binary so probably the sources are in C?). Then spend time to understand the code in more then 100 files.
Maybe for those cgi binarys can find sources in the open source files from netgear site, i didn't check.

I already hijacked some functionality in the interface, example here https://www.snbforums.com/threads/custom-firmware-build-for-r7800-v-1-0-2-22sf.37222/#post-305445

 

[Voxel]

Actually it seems available: https://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GPL/R7800-V1.0.2.63_gpl_src.tar.bz2.zip

And https://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GPL/R7800-V1.0.2.68_gpl_src.tar.bz2.zip

cc: @Voxel

You know... Release notes:

New Features and Enhancements:

• Supports FCC channels 136, 140, and 144

Bug Fixes:

• Fixes minor bugs

and such stuffs:

@Voxel
Do not use net-wall from stock .68 for your next release. See comment above

So... Better later... Minor bugs fixing vs major introductions.

Voxel.

 

[cordezz]

Hey guys,
I just tried to flash voxels 1.0.2.73 and 1.0.2.74 and my R7800 tells me: This firmware file is incorrect! Please get the firmware file again and make sure it is the correct firmware for this product.
I have never had this problem since I use voxels fw. Currently I am on V1.0.2.72SF so what could have happened that I am not able to install voxels newer fw versions?
Even when I try to reflash the V1.0.2.72SF it don't accept the fw file which worked some weeks ago.

/EDIT: After a reboot it seems to work

 

[ngoquata]

Hi all,
I'm using the latest V1.0.2.74SF firmware.
I have problem with Transmission. It "could not connect to HTTPS tracker" (http tracker work fine)
I'm a newbie. I do search for that but found no solution.
Is there anyone here have the same problem and know how to fix it?
Thank for reading!

 

[LeKeiser]

Hello,
I've just upgraded the firmware from 1.0.2.73SF to V.1.0.2.74SF and so far, no problem.
Thanx again, Mr Voxel and a Très Très Bonne Et Heureuse Année

 

[scooter2765]

Just upgraded to .74 upgrade went fine. Will let you know if I have any issues ...Thanks and Happy new Year !

 

[Voxel]

Hi all,
I'm using the latest V1.0.2.74SF firmware.
I have problem with Transmission. It "could not connect to HTTPS tracker" (http tracker work fine)
I'm a newbie. I do search for that but found no solution.
Is there anyone here have the same problem and know how to fix it?
Thank for reading!

I'll try to check but not right now. FYI: I do not use Transmission too often. But it is working for me for my not rare cases... (e.g. Debian ISO downloading.)

Voxel.

 

[Voxel]

Hello,
I've just upgraded the firmware from 1.0.2.73SF to V.1.0.2.74SF and so far, no problem.
Thanx again, Mr Voxel and a Très Très Bonne Et Heureuse Année

Merci beaucoup. Meilleurs voeux!

Voxel.

 

[hannez8014]

Hi
I have your latest firmware. It's great. When I do a ports an on 192.168.1.1 I am quite a noob but I like to learn. I see the following open ports 80,433,53, 548,22,3333, 9100-9103,20005. So my question is how do I close ports. And if there is any security issues with open ports that for services I don't use.

Skickat från min POT-LX1 via Tapatalk

 

[faktorqm]

Hi Voxel, thanks a lot for your firmware. It's very useful

I want to mention that I had to read a lot regarding HT160, netgear r7800 and intel 9260. I hope another person will found this info useful to avoid several reading hours. All I want was enable HT160 to see how it goes (besides the negative tests performed on SNB) so as the netgear r7800 original firmware didn't work at all (I directly lost my ac network just enabling HT160 mode) that leads me on this forum and your firmware. I have tried it on upper channels (is 100-128 considered upper channels?) and works very good so far. (very good means for me: my wifi does not get disconnected randomly, all my devices connnects without problems, and didn't noticied major issues. I didn't performed any serious benchmark though)
The 9260 network card does not support 80+80 (source: https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...0670/network-and-i-o/wireless-networking.html), so I set main channel on 128 to got the QCA working with correlative channels : 100+104+108+112+116+120+124+128(p) (other working config: 48 as main get as result 36+40+44+48(p)+52+56+60+64)
If I set channel 140, it doesn't work. It automatically resets to 36. Same behaviour for 132 and 136.

Ha ve a good start on this 2020!

 

[Voxel]

Hi
I have your latest firmware. It's great. When I do a ports an on 192.168.1.1 I am quite a noob but I like to learn. I see the following open ports 80,433,53, 548,22,3333, 9100-9103,20005. So my question is how do I close ports. And if there is any security issues with open ports that for services I don't use.

Skickat från min POT-LX1 via Tapatalk

These ports are used internally. E.g. 80/443 to access WebGUI. Just do not allow such stuffs as remote management. You should be in safety.

Voxel.

 

[Deleted member 22229]

Do not use net-wall from stock .68 for your next release. See comment above

Interesting. Testing .68 using IPv6 shows all ports as stealthy. I would assume with out a working firewall for v6 these ports would be open and insecure. Just not seeing that here. Am I missing something ?

 

[microchip]

Interesting. Testing .68 using IPv6 shows all ports as stealthy. I would assume with out a working firewall for v6 these ports would be open and insecure. Just not seeing that here. Am I missing something ?

I ran it manually. Maybe that's the difference. I used .68 for like half an hour just to see what's new. When I ran that command, it segfaulted. I didn't investigate further and flashed Voxel's

 

[Voxel]

I ran it manually. Maybe that's the difference.

It does not matter, manually or not. The same command is executed by other scripts/binaries. So if it is crashed in telnet (manual) it will be crashed if program/script runs the same command...

Other thing is (as I wrote) that bug might be minor and firewall was able to set IPv6 rules. Anyway, I did not include it (net-wall) during integration of 1.0.2.68 into 1.0.2.74.1SF...

Voxel.