Valhalla Legends Archive

Quote... i meant by when i keep getting autobanned by that i get autobanned from spam, idle, leaveban, etc.
or just lockdown

Interesting.  According to the results of the search I'd done after your earlier message, that shouldn't be happening.  The reason it shouldn't be happening is that all your accounts are barred from entering the channel at all, thus you can't hang around long enough to fall prey to automoderation.  (Well, aside from ~iK~ getting spambanned before it became yours (?), but that account has since been banlisted as well...)

Quotei got ~iK~ last night, it wasnt me that spammed in your channel

Even if I was inclined to believe you, the fact that all of your other names are *also* autobanned raises serious challenge to why that name should be allowed access.  It seems this case of mistaken identity was rather fortuitous.

Cuphead's the one who banlisted your Hackaware and ILurker names.  Take it up with him if you want those reversed.  Although, after your behavior as ~iK~, I'm rather inclined to restore the ban mark even if you convince Cuphead to remove it.  I consider it extremely rude to begin drawing multiline art in someone else's channel without permission.

Atom: I am aware of the forum's private messaging system.  I responded specifically to his question: a request for an AIM notification.

No, I can't.  I don't use AIM.  Besides which, as I understand it, each bot has its own password - and I cannot create bot IDs.  Can't speak for the others, but ~iK~ was banlisted for coming in and spamming the channel.

What name(s) are you using?  I could look up whether they're banned and why.  Also, doesn't it rather defeat the purpose to post a *password* on a *public* forum?

Though it is an organizational choice where you put what functions, I'd like to point out that usually when you compile a file, everything in that file is compiled for the resulting object.  A bigger file will take longer to compile.  Therefore, there is some value in having source files split out so that you don't needlessly recompile functions that haven't changed in months, just because they're in the same file as the new function you're writing and debugging.  The counterpoint is that fewer object files reduces the chance of using an outdated struct definition and confusing the program; however, most decent compiler suites will identify such dependencies for you.  Confused yet?

There is another way to go about it, depending on how "dedicated" this application is going to be (and on how limited).  If you are willing to confine it to <= 25 users and a dedicated account, just friendlist all the people you want to watch and send "/f l" on a timer and parse the results. :p  If you want something more flexible, the idea you discussed would be better.  However, be aware that doing all those queries could take up a substantial portion of your flood queue.  Additionally, since battle.net uses the amazingly unhelpful "That user is not logged on." response when someone isn't online (I'd much prefer if it had the username), you'll have to do some heuristics to figure when you have all the results.  You could just count up number of responses, but that then presumes the user hasn't manually tried anything in the interim (which he/she very well might, if you're querying enough people not to be able to use the friendlist -- that'd be a lot of people and quite a bit of time).  Another potential problem, if you search on command, is that the user gets impatient waiting for the bot to perform its queries and leaves, thus wasting your work. :p

Your ideas are on the right track, but I suggest seriously thinking about whether an online list is worth the amount of effort you'll have to put into it to make it work well.

You could just use BNLS, which will do the hashing for you.  If you're determined to do your hashing clientside, it's based off SHA-1, though it isn't exactly the same.

All the legitimate users should be able to get on the main battle.net servers; as for the others - they can wait til w3xp goes retail.  Others may disagree with me, but I see no value in developing such a project.

Eibro: I believe he's refering to "Warforge," a bnetd offshoot that mostly supported w3 beta, aside from requiring a hacked DLL to ignore a message they couldn't figure how to handle.

A new version of the botnet server is now in testing on port 0x5554.  It is being tested both for full backward compatibility, and for stability of the new features.  The specification for this revision is available at < http://www.valhallalegends.com/kp/kpbnproto030311.txt >.  Public testing is encouraged.  Please report any problems with the server or the specification in this thread.

[Update: it appears that only the botID I used for testing was configured into the server.  As a result, no one else is able to log on.  This problem can only be corrected by someone with access to the botnet registry.  Contact Skywing to have your ID added so that you may begin testing.  Sorry for the oversight.]

Unlike SCE, Blizzard's fix requires at least SP2 (IIRC) to work correctly.  Make sure you're up to date on your Windows 2000 service packs, then post back if the problem persists.

Quoteanother way to stop these are to have your bot automatically ban pings with -1, since floodbot always spoofs lag to that

That's a bad idea.  First, I've seen plenty of non-floodbots using -1 latency (why they wish to do this, I've never bothered to determine).  Second, the reason your moderator is flooding out is because it is sending so many ban commands -- so ordering it to autoban the floodbot will not help.  Third, it would be a trivial matter for the floodbot's designer to change it to use real latency, thus rendering you wrong.

QuoteHe'll eventually run out of cdkeys *and* realize he's an immature child.

Really?  I thought a prerequisite to running such tools was an immunity to those realizations.