[SBv3] 0x4A Unrecgonized

[Joe[x86]]

Code Select Expand

[15:55:32] Unrecognized BNCS packet SID_004A received:
0000:  49 58 38 36 45 78 74 72 61 57 6F 72 6B 2E 6D 70   IX86ExtraWork.mp
0010:  71 00                                             q.

SID_EXTRAWORK, I believe.

[Xenoc1de]

I am getting the same thing, right after cd-key check pass

Code Select Expand


[17:03:02] Passed version and CD-key check!
[17:03:02] Unrecognized BNCS packet SID_004A received:
0000:  49 58 38 36 45 78 74 72 61 57 6F 72 6B 2E 6D 70   IX86ExtraWork.mp
0010:  71 00                                             q.


[Warrior]

afaik, doesn't battle.net send this once in a while?

[UserLoser.]

It's unrecognized because the bot doesn't handle it.   Handling it would suck in a user friendly bot as it would have to pause the logon process, download the file then execute and reply before logging in.  The bot will automatically begin the actual account logon part after it received a successful version/cdkey check.  Ok, well, Battle.net sends you cdkey/version success response, the bot then begins logon part right away, but wait, Battle.net now is sending extrawork request.  It's too late for the bot to reply since it's already logging in and you must download the file and reply before logging in.  Therefore, useless.

[MyndFyre]

It's unrecognized because the bot doesn't handle it.   Handling it would suck in a user friendly bot as it would have to pause the logon process, download the file then execute and reply before logging in.  The bot will automatically begin the actual account logon part after it received a successful version/cdkey check.  Ok, well, Battle.net sends you cdkey/version success response, the bot then begins logon part right away, but wait, Battle.net now is sending extrawork request.  It's too late for the bot to reply since it's already logging in and you must download the file and reply before logging in.  Therefore, useless.

How about just handling it by saying to the user "Battle.net is requesting (but not requiring) client work validation." ?

Some user-friendly bot it is if it dumps hex data to the screen for the user to look at blankly. 

[UserLoser.]

It's unrecognized because the bot doesn't handle it.   Handling it would suck in a user friendly bot as it would have to pause the logon process, download the file then execute and reply before logging in.  The bot will automatically begin the actual account logon part after it received a successful version/cdkey check.  Ok, well, Battle.net sends you cdkey/version success response, the bot then begins logon part right away, but wait, Battle.net now is sending extrawork request.  It's too late for the bot to reply since it's already logging in and you must download the file and reply before logging in.  Therefore, useless.

How about just handling it by saying to the user "Battle.net is requesting (but not requiring) client work validation." ?

Some user-friendly bot it is if it dumps hex data to the screen for the user to look at blankly. 

Nothing I could do about that, only if I were to write a simple small little plugin... Anyways, this *should* filter it: KillExtraWork plugin

[Joe[x86]]

CheckBoxes are your friend.

Code Select Expand

[ ] Show unhandled packets

[MyndFyre]

x86] link=topic=11489.msg111182#msg111182 date=1115326728]
CheckBoxes are your friend.

Code Select Expand

[ ] Show unhandled packets

And I suppose that the average idiot user knows what an unhandled packet is?

[Joe[x86]]

Defaults are your friend.

Code Select Expand

[X] Ignore unhandled packets (leave this on if you don't know what it means)

[Warrior]

Code Select Expand


[X] Get over it.


[MyndFyre]

x86] link=topic=11489.msg111243#msg111243 date=1115348301]
Defaults are your friend.

Code Select Expand

[X] Ignore unhandled packets (leave this on if you don't know what it means)

Are any of these options that you describe already in SphtBotV3, Joe?

I really don't use it, so I don't know.  I assume they are not; otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.

And even that isn't the point.  0x4a is known; we understand what it does, and have a pretty good guess as to why it's done.  It should be handled, even if it displays, as I suggested, "Battle.net is asking for, but not requiring, extra client validation."

Just because you don't mimic the client 100% doesn't mean that you can't just act as if that particular message is handled.

[Joe[x86]]

What I'm poking at is it shouldn't be shown as unknown. It should be displayed as you said, or actually parsed and executed (how hard would this be? I've never done it).

[Falcon[anti-yL]]

Does that message bother so you much?

[Warrior]

God, use the plugin and get over it. Christ.

[Joe[x86]]

BCEL.dll failed to load. Okay, lets have another discussion!