[Rules] Regarding mBot's actual state

[PortalDark]

Many have noticed that for some weeks now, mBot's crack is no longer working properly

Since we have already a method to make this work manually(thanks theross/silkbotter), we will be a bit more strict when new methods are created.

Since the bot is not our property and many could use a patch as a way to inject or backdoor your pc, we will only accept patch threads ONLY IF THE SOURCE IS SEND TO US, THE SRO MOD TEAM



As for the actual threads, I will close all of those except theross and jamaluata's thread, to enforce this.

Hope you understand this is to avoid "l337 h4x" with patches to make havok on the section

Thanks for your time

[Devsome]

How can we go sure, that you do not use the source for your own use ?
Anyways, good rule.

[​Exo]

Originally Posted by Devsome

How can we go sure, that you do not use the source for your own use ?
Anyways, good rule.

Because you can always demod him.

 Spoiler

jk jk, he wouldn't do it anyway xD

[Spidy.]

Why no stick

[magicanoo]

How can you be sure that the source I give you is the same one that is released? Picture this scenario :
1) A user gives you a clean source code.
2) The user compiles a malicious code within the program and encrypt/pack/obfuscate it claiming to be "protecting his **** from being decompiled by other members".
3) The user will release that infected program saying "Portal has already checked it and he guarantees it".
4) We report you to an admin and you get an instant ban for infecting members, which is justified because you endorsed it.

Unless you want to be the one taking responsibility for uploading and putting the links on his thread (after you compile it yourself)?

[​Goofie​]

Originally Posted by magicanoo

How can you be sure that the source I give you is the same one that is released? Picture this scenario :
1) A user gives you a clean source code.
2) The user compiles a malicious code within the program and encrypt/pack/obfuscate it claiming to be "protecting his **** from being decompiled by other members".
3) The user will release that infected program saying "Portal has already checked it and he guarantees it".
4) We report you to an admin and you get an instant ban for infecting members, which is justified because you endorsed it.

Unless you want to be the one taking responsibility for uploading and putting the links on his thread (after you compile it yourself)?

Yeah, that was really back-thinking. This idea will only cause more headache then how it is now.

Just download Malwarebytes and your fine, you can also run the bot in "shield" mode, starting it with your anti-virus to see if it detects something weird.

[Callum]

Originally Posted by magicanoo

How can you be sure that the source I give you is the same one that is released? Picture this scenario :
1) A user gives you a clean source code.
2) The user compiles a malicious code within the program and encrypt/pack/obfuscate it claiming to be "protecting his **** from being decompiled by other members".
3) The user will release that infected program saying "Portal has already checked it and he guarantees it".
4) We report you to an admin and you get an instant ban for infecting members, which is justified because you endorsed it.

Unless you want to be the one taking responsibility for uploading and putting the links on his thread (after you compile it yourself)?

We have our ways for checking this beforehand

[PortalDark]

Originally Posted by magicanoo

How can you be sure that the source I give you is the same one that is released? Picture this scenario :
1) A user gives you a clean source code.
2) The user compiles a malicious code within the program and encrypt/pack/obfuscate it claiming to be "protecting his **** from being decompiled by other members".
3) The user will release that infected program saying "Portal has already checked it and he guarantees it".
4) We report you to an admin and you get an instant ban for infecting members, which is justified because you endorsed it.

Unless you want to be the one taking responsibility for uploading and putting the links on his thread (after you compile it yourself)?

indeed you are right

that's why we can compile it and post it once we have the source

This way, we can assure that the patch is safe

also, there is not going to be 1 patch every 10 minutes(like the advertising section), so we compiling it shouldnt be an issue

[_HouseMusicx3]

Isn't anyone from the moderators team able to code such a patcher ? that would make it much easier

[Devsome]

You can use my C++ source code.


Just patch the IP addresse to anyone else and insert the php you need for the verification.

[Nectix]

#pinned

[PortalDark]

Originally Posted by _HouseMusicx3

Isn't anyone from the moderators team able to code such a patcher ? that would make it much easier

I have very small advance coding(specially regarding messing up with something that is already done)

Also, I specialize on C# and most of the code that I found is on C++(yeah, laugh at me)

[Haxor]

Originally Posted by magicanoo

How can you be sure that the source I give you is the same one that is released? Picture this scenario :
1) A user gives you a clean source code.
2) The user compiles a malicious code within the program and encrypt/pack/obfuscate it claiming to be "protecting his **** from being decompiled by other members".
3) The user will release that infected program saying "Portal has already checked it and he guarantees it".
4) We report you to an admin and you get an instant ban for infecting members, which is justified because you endorsed it.

Unless you want to be the one taking responsibility for uploading and putting the links on his thread (after you compile it yourself)?

1- The user give mods clean code and they check and everything fine
2- the use post the thread with the program of the clean
3- the user edit the post after few days with infected program
4-the user start using ddos attack from the users who clicked on .exe infected file on his target pservers.

[MystikA']

Originally Posted by Devsome

You can use my C++ source code.


Just patch the IP addresse to anyone else and insert the php you need for the verification.

yeah , this one works great.

[LastThief*]

Originally Posted by magicanoo

How can you be sure that the source I give you is the same one that is released? Picture this scenario :
1) A user gives you a clean source code.
2) The user compiles a malicious code within the program and encrypt/pack/obfuscate it claiming to be "protecting his **** from being decompiled by other members".
3) The user will release that infected program saying "Portal has already checked it and he guarantees it".
4) We report you to an admin and you get an instant ban for infecting members, which is justified because you endorsed it.

Unless you want to be the one taking responsibility for uploading and putting the links on his thread (after you compile it yourself)?

"How to get moderators banned" cliche