[Workshop] Updating code to work post client V.5018

unknownone · 12/29/2008, 04:14

tomato

L1nk1n*P4rK · 12/29/2008, 10:24

Very nice, thanks

YukiXian · 12/29/2008, 11:20

@unknownone,
Looks really nice, I'll try it

Ultimatum · 12/29/2008, 15:20

I did it another way, blowfish encrypting and decrypting is easy, its the dh key exchange that im stuck on x.x.

- Thats a txt file decrypter i made.

unknownone · 12/29/2008, 19:52

aubergene

Korvacs · 12/30/2008, 01:48

A warning to anyone trying to do this on a 64 bit OS with "any-cpu" as their output setting, Managedopenssl.dll works fine in 64bit mode, but libeay32.dll which managedopenssl.dll wraps DOES NOT, unless you wanna rebuild the managedopenssl project with libeay64.dll you will need to force your project to output in dedicated x86 mode.

Save yourself the headache ive endurred for the past week and a half.

BoboDundo · 12/31/2008, 10:42

I sure wish I would of checked a few days ago. Could of been working on this instead of wasting time play CO. Thank you for releasing this information. Now the decision to rewrite the java code into C/C++/Delphi or to simply update the java code.

Just to make sure I understand correctly. Assuming I get the coding down correctly, it should work with the 5090/5091 client, correct?

unknownone · 12/31/2008, 10:48

potato

tanelipe · 12/31/2008, 12:08

#Deleted offtopic posts

~~tao4229~~ · 12/31/2008, 16:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoboDundo

I sure wish I would of checked a few days ago. Could of been working on this instead of wasting time play CO. Thank you for releasing this information. Now the decision to rewrite the java code into C/C++/Delphi or to simply update the java code.

Just to make sure I understand correctly. Assuming I get the coding down correctly, it should work with the 5090/5091 client, correct?

As unknown said, the encryptions will work.
But as far as packet structures, they're probably different, maybe even some new/removed packets.(I mean c'mon, about 75 patches, they've gotta have screwed something up...)

I started working on this yesterday, looks like unknown pretty much handed out the bag of goodies so far, all I need to do is test it and see where to go from there.

tanelipe · 12/31/2008, 16:49

There seems to be a little problem after the key exhange, trying to figure out it still. >_> I can say that the login packet was changed atleast.

(Btw unknowone my Conquer.exe was messed that's why the messed up packet , the one that has IP&Port.. )

~~tao4229~~ · 12/31/2008, 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanelipe

There seems to be a little problem after the key exhange, trying to figure out it still. >_> I can say that the login packet was changed atleast.

(Btw unknownone my Conquer.exe was messed that's why the messed up packet , the one that has IP&Port.. )

Apparently the new patches(5086+ or something) have new login packets, but I'm doing it on 5030 or so, just so it's close to what I already have. I haven't tried the key exchange or even decrypting it yet, lemme go work on it

GL :O

BoboDundo · 12/31/2008, 17:20

The only issue with using 5090 is they started encrypting server.dat. I'll need to revert back to a previous one before they started encrypting the server.dat (anyone know which patch it was where they started doing that?). I know there are examples in the coding forum to bypass the server.dat, but that was before they started encrypting. There will need to be a little more work to bypass the server.dat decrypt now using olly. I don't recall seeing any updated information on this anywhere.

I'm ok with packet changes. My first step is to simply get my packet logger working. From there I can start to figure out changes (hopefully).

Quote:

Originally Posted by tao4229

As unknown said, the encryptions will work.
But as far as packet structures, they're probably different, maybe even some new/removed packets.(I mean c'mon, about 75 patches, they've gotta have screwed something up...)

I started working on this yesterday, looks like unknown pretty much handed out the bag of goodies so far, all I need to do is test it and see where to go from there.

unknownone · 12/31/2008, 20:05

turnip

LetterX · 12/31/2008, 20:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoboDundo

The only issue with using 5090 is they started encrypting server.dat. I'll need to revert back to a previous one before they started encrypting the server.dat (anyone know which patch it was where they started doing that?). I know there are examples in the coding forum to bypass the server.dat, but that was before they started encrypting. There will need to be a little more work to bypass the server.dat decrypt now using olly. I don't recall seeing any updated information on this anywhere.

I'm ok with packet changes. My first step is to simply get my packet logger working. From there I can start to figure out changes (hopefully).

For the encrypted server.dat, it was encrypted around 5078 I believe.