Quick Question: CDKeys with letters in them

[Don Cullen]

it's easy enough to support both. And if you use something like BNCSutil, you can hash CD keys and passwords and all that without any hash files.

The less dependencies, the better.

[Sorc.Polgara]

it's easy enough to support both. And if you use something like BNCSutil, you can hash CD keys and passwords and all that without any hash files.

The less dependencies, the better.

I guess it depends on what you consider a dependency because relying on BNLS for hashing passwords, cdkeys, and game files to me is three functional dependencies, granted they all depend on BNLS.  Where as using BNLS for hashing game files and BNCSutil for hashing cdkeys and passwords is still 3 functional dependencies in my eyes.

Anyways, I don't see your reasoning for using BNLS for cdkey and password hashing since it's slower because you have to construct, send, receive, and parse extra BNLS packets for cdkey and password hashing instead of just doing it locally.

[Barabajagal]

it's easy enough to support both. And if you use something like BNCSutil, you can hash CD keys and passwords and all that without any hash files.

The less dependencies, the better.

And as it is, you're dependent on a third-party server to do what can be done locally. I'd rather have a second option for my users, just in case. Especially cause you can technically do all the hashing within your own code (it's just faster using a dll than vb).

[Don Cullen]

I don't think you guys understand; by dependency, I meant file dependency. I'm trying to minimize the amount of files required by my program. ATM, it only requires one: itself.

[Barabajagal]

If it's written in vb, it also requires the VB runtime environment. And it requires BNLS/JBLS to be working, and probably MSWINSCK.OCX, and I'm sure some other OCX or DLL files. The point is it's better to have user convenience than few dependencies.

[Don Cullen]

Perhaps you have a point. But even then, that's not really an option thanks to lockdown.

[Barabajagal]

Works for d2/war3, and BNLS is currently not working, so there's no way to connect on SC anyway.

[Ersan]

Using pure visual basic for all the algorithms used during logon is horribly inefficient, I would much prefer someone use a C++ library like bncsutil.

I'm sure there's some way to include the DLL inside your program binary and extract it to a temporary folder for usage, the license bncsutil uses permits this (LGPL).

[rabbit]

Yeah, that's pretty easy to do, actually.

[replaced]

Using pure visual basic for all the algorithms used during logon is horribly inefficient, I would much prefer someone use a C++ library like bncsutil.

I'm sure there's some way to include the DLL inside your program binary and extract it to a temporary folder for usage, the license bncsutil uses permits this (LGPL).

Umm no

Instead of taking 2 milliseconds to complete it takes 4?

[rabbit]

No, more like instead of taking 200 milliseconds it takes 40000.

[l2k-Shadow]

No, more like instead of taking 200 milliseconds it takes 40000.

And trying to overcome the signed/unsigned barrier and writing functions to do operations such as << and >> that native VB does not have. GL trying to be speed efficient.

[brew]

Wait wait hold up! If Kyro is trying to make his bot only use one file (the .exe itself) he should definately go the BNLS route. And, ffs, even use registry keys. I know this has been done before (daemonchat). But I recommend, going the older route, which is having a config.ini file, hashes, bncsutil.dll, so on. In the long run it's faster, requires less code, and in general is more efficient. I highly disapprove of your bot depending soley on BNLS though, because BNLS is just too unreliable. It's been "down" more then ever, and let's face it: It still requires updates itself. Let's say there's a new patch, and nobody updated BNLS. Everyone's stuck with the same problem! You need an option to update your bot by yourself. I, myself, am fed up with depending on other 3rd party services that sometimes work.

[rabbit]

Then YOU reverse lockdown.  Battle.net isn't so crucial to my existence that I go stark raving mad if I can't get on because BNLS is down.  I don't want people who feel the same way using my bots, either.  My stuff is designed for the person who wants to chat with as little effort as possible.  Having them check bncsutil versions, hash file versions, bot versions, and registry settings is stupid.

[Mystical]

welll i haven't seen any loads or floods since BNLS has been down. =D

eaither way this checkrevision hurts the battle.net bot development community, and because most bot programmers weather you program in vb6, java, c++, .Net don't have the asm knowledge.

Even if it was released publicy i'd much rather have loads, floods going as long as i can still connect! instead of relying on BNLS and if not BNLS using limited clients to connect. not like i care but i idle in a small idled channel anyways floods/loads don't affect me.


EDIT: remember is was a anti-hack movement not an anti-bot movement its just making it worse for us. =(

Since Spht Deleted the post in the other thread this current BNLS IP works for those of you that need to connect =)
84.9.75.83