0000: FF 51 49 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 00 02 A7 84 7A 8C ÿQI.......§,,zŒ
0010: 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 10 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 .............
0020: 13 4D 00 00 00 00 00 00 XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX ................
0030: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 00 NN AA MM ................
0040: EE NN AA MM EE NA MM EE 00 .........
The result.
0000: FF 51 09 00 00 00 00 00 00 ÿQ.......
Do you see what's missing.
Hint it's not my cdkey or my cdkey username.
EXE Information. Interesting... which product were you emulating? Does it work reliably without this field? How about with other products?
warcraft 2, worked every time tryed this about 5 times and each time I logged in fine.
never tryed any other clients.
going to asume all the legacy clients for some reason support this.
tested and worked on PXES, PX2D, LTRD(old login), NB2W (allready said).
edit: At the moment I have no way to test this on war3 or war3x, so somone else can attempt it at their own risk lol.
Are you sure it ever did ban for this?
very havent been banned yet.
seems you can leave the cdkey username blank aswell.
0000: FF 51 3E 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 00 02 C5 4A 21 09 ÿQ>.......ÅJ!.
0010: 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 10 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 .............
0020: 13 4D 00 00 00 00 00 00 XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX M..............
0030: XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 00 00 ................
0000: FF 51 09 00 00 00 00 00 00 ÿQ.......
edit: I could asume why this works since the server 'can' take this packet for the non cdkeyed clients aswell, but this still dosent explain why the exe info is an optional section..
Perhaps it requires it when CheckRevision indicates that the product is out of date? Got some old game files handy? :)
I wonder if there are any other packet fields that we previously thought were required which simply aren't?
http://forum.valhallalegends.com/phpbbs/index.php?topic=8198.0
To be more clear, let's refer to BnetDocs' documentation for 0x51:
(DWORD) Client Token
(DWORD) EXE Version
(DWORD) EXE Hash
(DWORD) Number of keys in this packet
(BOOLEAN) Using Spawn (32-bit)
For Each Key:
(DWORD) Key Length
(DWORD) CD key's product value
(DWORD) CD key's public value
(DWORD) Unknown (0)
(DWORD[5]) Hashed Key Data
(STRING) Exe Information
(STRING) CD Key owner name
The EXE Version on Mac products is stored as the last DWORD in the data fork of the executable file (if I remember correctly). The EXE hash is indeed calculated on Macs. Whether or not it's actually checked server-side I don't know, but it wouldn't make sense as it is a perfect method of checking to see if the executable has been altered. Since the EXE Version is retrieved through a Windows API call with regards to the exe file format, and there is no equivalent Macintosh Toolbox call, Blizzard had decided to put the correct value in an easy-to-retrieve location.
It does not surprise me that the EXE Information is not required; I've noticed that when I had changed my War2BNE application's file name to something else, it had sent the changed filename instead of War2BNE, and Battle.net still accepted it. I then tried sending random data in my client and Battle.net still accepted it.
It *does* surprise me that Battle.net allows the CD Key Owner field to be blank: I recall (quite a long time ago, admittedly... like just after 0x51 came out) sending it as NULL once and getting banned. But I suppose it could be possible that I was banned for something else, as it was just as I was ironing out a lot of connection bugs.
The executable information string could be sent null for as far back as I can rememeber...
Quote from: Arta[vL] on June 01, 2005, 08:24 AM
Perhaps it requires it when CheckRevision indicates that the product is out of date? Got some old game files handy? :)
checked with older hash files no need for it there either, still gives you the invalid version regardless.
Has anyone tried with random junk in that field?
Quote from: tA-Kane on June 01, 2005, 02:49 PM
I then tried sending random data in my client and Battle.net still accepted it.
Quote from: raylu on June 01, 2005, 05:40 PM
Has anyone tried with random junk in that field?
^^;
Maybe they have plans on removeing that string all together sometime in the future? is all I can think of, it would save them a little bandwidth anyways considering howmany people connect everyday.
It's possible that they could save bandwidth... but it would be nominal. Plus, paying for download bandwidth is usually pennies compared to paying for upload bandwidth.