New bot...

[Hacks]

Dunno, I'd love a bot like that, and wouldn't be willing to pay...but cracking something like that? That's like defiling the mona lisa lol.

[DeathLord]

i did not say i agree with cracking... i agree with the free ideea ... at least for us :P

[pro4never]

Hm... I agree that this would be a great idea but pay to use final version again somewhat troubling... Anyways hope to see the beta version when you release it

Also I agree that this should not be a standalone seing as that has been proven to be quite easy for tq to fight (when they get off their fat *** and actualy try >_>)

Bjx was nice but I always knew it was for disposable characters.. I just wish more ppl had realised that b4 so many ppl got arested >_> Hopefully this one will be much harder for tq to detect

Gl

[anticlownn]

Originally posted by ultimatedestroyer@Oct 25 2005, 13:01
Hmmm Hojo we dont crack eachothers bots, only outsiders.

Lol, I'd crack whatever requires payment.

[unknownone]

Originally posted by anticlownn@Oct 26 2005, 22:20

Lol, I'd crack whatever requires payment.

I agree. Particularly because this post says
"I want YOU to do all my research for this bot, then I'm going to make you pay for it."

Thats what I understood reading trhough quickly.

[xBlacKTigeRx]

we do the 'research'
he does the 'work'
he makes us pay
we make us not pay

[anticlownn]

lol if you have all the research done, all the packets and addresses written down then teh work shouldn't be the most difficult parto f it.

[xBlacKTigeRx]

so let him say hes going to make us do a majority of the work for it, then make us pay...we'll just make it so we wont have to pay

[omega02]

oh wow so cool i cant wait

[~Unknown~]

PM me if you need some more help I'm usually available

[1Rainbow]

If u need a person to help i shall help

[jMerliN]

Originally posted by Hojo@Oct 25 2005, 01:36
Oh btw, getting peopl to pay is not a good idea. Considering we cracked BJX whats stoping us cracking yours?

Support the hacker ethic, keep it free and open source...

Free if anything...

You cracked BJX.. way to go. Any novice with a packet sniffer and a hex editor can crack BJX :\ If you crack protection I put on there you deserve to be working for NSA doing ****..


And it's not so much protection as the software will be compiled so that if it's not run on a certain machine ( the one it's made for ) it will NOT work at all ( no not a simple check ) as in.. the software will not correctly deflate and decode itself in memory unless it's on the correct machine. And the deflation routine doesn't deflate the code that performs the operations, they're interwoven so there's no dump of the code that does it, heirgo no breaking it. I hope you the best of luck if you choose it. Or you could just pay a little bit and have it hassle free =). Besides, if you guys decide to "crack" my stuff, which I allowed you to use a free beta without paying, I'll gladly tell TQ exactly how to fix it then remake the bot with better/newer protection and re-release it.

[chocoman4k]

Well first a comment to another ultimative CO bot: This is the 5th time I heard about a new bot (which is most likely never gonna be released), all of those projects have probably been cancelled.
Do you even know how to login and reply to the bot check packets? I doubt that.

The way I cracked BJX requires a bit more than just an hex editor and a packet sniffer. If it was so easy why didn't you crack it?

Shareware authors thinking hardware protections were some heavy kind of protection were proven wrong some hours after they released their protected software.
Redirecting some API's so that the software thinks it's always running on 1 computer combined with a valid serial for that machine is the easiest way to crack that kind of protection.
Once your software runs in functional mode (when it can do the job it's made for) it can be dumped, all parts rebuilt, cracked and be used in registered mode.
And if you do not distribute shareware versions of that software, 1 registered copy is enough in order to make a version fully functional on every machine.
If you want to play the cat-n-mouse game (releasing new versions of your software when it's cracked) remember, there are 10.000 crackers vs 1 shareware author.

I gave up protecting all of my software, it causes additional incompatibility, instability, bugs, slows the software down on runtime, and if a cracker really wants to crack it, it will be cracked. All I do now is UPX it and remove decompression informations so that some novice crackers couldn't see the code.

Anything which runs can be cracked, and the cracker is always the winner in the end.

[t3hn00bz0r]

Very true. But it is very fun to write fully functioning self decrypting programs where the key depends on a registration key. Remember that you dont have to make a program uncrackable (that's just not logical), just too much effort to crack for the person trying to crack it. Besides, the cat and mouse game can be a lot of fun.

[Hojo]

Originally posted by chocoman4k@Nov 12 2005, 10:42
Well first a comment to another ultimative CO bot: This is the 5th time I heard about a new bot (which is most likely never gonna be released), all of those projects have probably been cancelled.
Do you even know how to login and reply to the bot check packets? I doubt that.

The way I cracked BJX requires a bit more than just an hex editor and a packet sniffer. If it was so easy why didn't you crack it?

Shareware authors thinking hardware protections were some heavy kind of protection were proven wrong some hours after they released their protected software.
Redirecting some API's so that the software thinks it's always running on 1 computer combined with a valid serial for that machine is the easiest way to crack that kind of protection.
Once your software runs in functional mode (when it can do the job it's made for) it can be dumped, all parts rebuilt, cracked and be used in registered mode.
And if you do not distribute shareware versions of that software, 1 registered copy is enough in order to make a version fully functional on every machine.
If you want to play the cat-n-mouse game (releasing new versions of your software when it's cracked) remember, there are 10.000 crackers vs 1 shareware author.

I gave up protecting all of my software, it causes additional incompatibility, instability, bugs, slows the software down on runtime, and if a cracker really wants to crack it, it will be cracked. All I do now is UPX it and remove decompression informations so that some novice crackers couldn't see the code.

Anything which runs can be cracked, and the cracker is always the winner in the end.

lol, ******* owned :P