• Welcome to Valhalla Legends Archive.
 

Flood Bots & Trying to ban them

Started by Networks, May 26, 2004, 02:41 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

effect

Quote from: Gangz on May 27, 2004, 12:33 AM
Work from a point that works then perfect it.

i quite like that advice.
Quote from: Mangix on March 22, 2005, 03:03 AM
i am an expert Stealthbot VBScript. Recognize Bitch.

Networks

#16
Quote from: Mephisto on May 26, 2004, 10:19 PM
Why are you checking for a certain number of milliseconds before sending the ban?  Seems like it'd be a waste of time as the calculations may cost you a couple milliseconds to check which is something you wanted to avoid.  I would just ban them unconditionally if you really wanted to get rid of flood bots.  Perhaps  a floodbot mode that acted as an unconditional join ban?

Originally it was HH:MM:SS but I wanted to see how far off I might have been thus the I added milliseconds. I competely understand filtering but not all bots as well as the actual client have filtering. I was just wondering if anyone still had any ideas besides filtering. ( I can try right? )

The way mine works is that if the bot joins and the leaves it will be added to the banlist but even when it is added to the ban list and shows up again I still can't seem to ban on join.

LordNevar

Try just adding a protection code like stealths [EFP]. Don't have it look from a banlist, just have it ban everyone upon joining and go from there. Have it add users to a banlist after it bans [WILDCARDS], than just go back and unban everyone that you didn't want banned. Atleast that's how I worked my flood protection. My banning's not perfect but it does handle the job decently enough not to be to annoyed by them. Just lock the chat and join/leaves to create less lag for the bot, and you should be fine.

A good fortune may forbode a bad luck, which may in turn disguise a good fortune.
The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled, was convincing the world he didn't exsist.

Eric

#18
QuoteOriginally it was HH:MM:SS but I wanted to see how far off I might have been thus the I added milliseconds.
The time you add the ban to your chat window is most likely not the time Battle.net receives your ban, nor is it the time in which Battle.net responds to the ban.

Gangz

Quote from: LoRd[nK] on May 27, 2004, 11:01 AM
QuoteOriginally it was HH:MM:SS but I wanted to see how far off I might have been thus the I added milliseconds.
The time you add the ban to your chat window is most likely not the time Battle.net receives your ban, nor is it the time in which Battle.net responds to the ban.

This is true but you will never truely know when bnet gets it, or how long its taking bnet to respond. You might have a fast enough connection to ban it but bnet is not responding fast enough.

Eric

#20
Quote from: Gangz on May 27, 2004, 03:30 PM
Quote from: LoRd[nK] on May 27, 2004, 11:01 AM
QuoteOriginally it was HH:MM:SS but I wanted to see how far off I might have been thus the I added milliseconds.
The time you add the ban to your chat window is most likely not the time Battle.net receives your ban, nor is it the time in which Battle.net responds to the ban.
This is true but you will never truely know when bnet gets it, or how long its taking bnet to respond. You might have a fast enough connection to ban it but bnet is not responding fast enough.
Which was pretty much my point...

Dyndrilliac

I stated in a previous thread somewhere my method, which build profiles based on a flooder's activities and waits for an oppertune time to send an unconditional ban. It bans about 60-80% of the time, however it can be time consuming if there are only a couple operators and several floodbots, and there are ways around it including erratic rejoin delays. However, if you want to try that method, it will work best with a Warcraft III Clan Channel and the maximum amount of operators. Pointless if the channel only ever has a handful of different people in it at all times.
Quote from: Edsger W. DijkstraIt is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC; as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.