StarCraft Patch 1.12 Coming Soon

[UserLoser.]

The main reason they would is because it's more secure.  Unless, if course, you're using BNLS, but shh...

What are you trying to say?

[Eric]

The main reason they would is because it's more secure.  Unless, if course, you're using BNLS, but shh...

What are you trying to say?

BNLS is backdoored.  Run!

You should know that the information you send BNLS is sent plain-text which pretty much makes hashing pointless for anything other than passing authorization.

[iago]

The main reason they would is because it's more secure.  Unless, if course, you're using BNLS, but shh...

What are you trying to say?

BNLS is backdoored.  Run!

You should know that the information you send BNLS is sent plain-text which pretty much makes hashing pointless for anything other than passing authorization.

That's correct -- Blizzard can use all the strong encryption methods they want, but as long as people are sending passwords in cleartext to BNLS, the security is voided.

[Kp]

I don't see why you'd download a new client, but having a patch applied is normal for Blizzard products, and people understand them.

I believe his point was that they'd need to upgrade all legacy clients (Diablo 1, Starcraft, Warcraft II, maybe the sharewares), and such an upgrade would be in the form of a patch, but they haven't announced any further patches for d1/w2.

[Zakath]

If I recall right, lots of older-tenured Blizzard staff have left the company. While they'd still have the code, I wonder if they have many people left who are actually familiar with how those older games were written...patching them could be a rather involved process.

[tA-Kane]

Even if those people that worked on the legacy clients were still there, you'd be surprised how quickly memories can fade. If you haven't worked on a project for years and then a new major patch was wanted, you'd have to reaquaint yourself with your own code again, just to figure out what all is needed.

[iago]

We managed to find and interpret their login code from assembly, hopefully they could go back and do it from (I'm sure somewhat) commented C code.  Hopefully.  That is, of course, only if they care.

[Networks]

I don't think they care about compatibility with CHAT.  They've been restricting CHAT more and more, and I wouldn't be overly suprised if they just dropped it entirely.

As for announcements, the change would be invisible for anybody on a real client (I assume they wouldn't force new accounts or a new namespace), so Blizzard would have no reason to announce it.

I doubt they'd just drop it. Isn't its main use just to see if you can even get on battle.net using a username and password? Seems like its uses are just for connectivity and logon purposes for battle.net.

[Joe[x86]]

I always thought it was because people wanted to chat on bnet from friends houses and stuff without installing a client, thus Bnet via Telnet was created. Then again, I'm usually wrong.

[Rizon]

I don't think they care about compatibility with CHAT.  They've been restricting CHAT more and more, and I wouldn't be overly suprised if they just dropped it entirely.

They wouldn't drop chat entirely, because Blizzard reps use it.

[WoOdTroll]

I remember when USEast was covered in bots, all the mad server splits and crap.

[CrAz3D]

I remember when USEast was covered in bots, all the mad server splits and crap.

I always found that entertaining...I recall when I first saw someone on a bot, I was UBER impressed!

[iago]

I don't think they care about compatibility with CHAT.  They've been restricting CHAT more and more, and I wouldn't be overly suprised if they just dropped it entirely.

They wouldn't drop chat entirely, because Blizzard reps use it.

Blizzard reps have indicated that they'll soon be changing to using JavaOp to connect.

[Warrior]

rofl.

[l)ragon]

I don't think they care about compatibility with CHAT.  They've been restricting CHAT more and more, and I wouldn't be overly suprised if they just dropped it entirely.

They wouldn't drop chat entirely, because Blizzard reps use it.

heh when last i checked, TechBot was an nbbot.