Messages

1

Botdev / Re: Universal Bot: URL Protocol

« on: February 03, 2006, 05:52:04 pm »

Based on review of negative vs positive feedback. People who voted it as a good idea: 5 People who voted it as a bad idea: 3 People who said "maybe, if..": 3. Unpoupular? Discouraged? I'm just making points, or I was. But like I said, I'm done now. So nothing to worry about.

2

Botdev / Re: Universal Bot: URL Protocol

« on: January 31, 2006, 09:44:55 pm »

Perhaps my words are not clear enough, I think it's more of you guys not seeing it the way I see it, instead, seeing it as the way you see it. But I'm not going to explain it again, your right, it is a waste of time. Consider the topic closed. You people are worse than vL. Peace.

3

Botdev / Re: Universal Bot: URL Protocol

« on: January 31, 2006, 04:52:04 pm »

That would give it alot of power from remote users, and would make it exploitable. Yes it would be excellent, but I personally would like to avoid that path. Useless? Well Sidoh, since you've stated that you think its useless at least 4 times already, I think we got your opinion down pretty good... No offense. But you do have a pheasable point of view, one protocol, for one application, yeah... probably a waste of time. But I put the word Universal in the topic's subject name because if there were a handfull or more bots that used this, it would become powerful, fast, efficient, and very useful to a numerous amount of people. And we add things like Botnet support to our bots, which most of the time goes without even being used.. This protocol is very simple to implement, and, it only requires a very minimal modification of the Windows Registry. Perhaps after I get a few more people who may be interested, I will post the Idea on the vL forums, and see what they think of it... Thanks for the feedback guys.

4

Graphics / Re: My website design > *

« on: January 31, 2006, 04:45:12 pm »

I meant old school as the nav buttons attatched to a bar on the left, content box, and nav on the top. Most new websites have all sorts of crazy stuff to the left and right and everywhere in between.

5

Botdev / Re: Universal Bot: URL Protocol

« on: January 30, 2006, 10:25:19 pm »

See, you guys are getting the idea. The main concept your missing though, is it is not ONLY limited to web interfacing. I only referred to it, because its popular, its been done before, and this would allow even more power through that type of interface. People often write configuration utilities for bots to help setup config files. This could do it in one line. You could command the bot to enter a game. You could command the bot to perform a ban. Not only from other web interfaces, but from other applications, command lines, shortcuts, anything that will launch a URL. You can integrate a battle.net bot into so many different applications and services, its not even funny. Plus, its totally secure! There can be no "remote" control though a protocol listen on a local machine. It's like creating your own "localhost" which points to your local IP. This is your own URL that points to your own Application. If specifications were wrote, you could control 10 bots at the same time, on completely different servers, through one URL. One hit, one kill. Power. Endless Power. Non Exploitable. Perfect Sense. Say your bot uses local hashing, and it uses local hashing for a reason. If you didn't want users using BNLS, but still wanted to use it to check for updates, You could add support for your bot to connect to BNLS simply to check for updates. Instead of writing an entire new application to do this, you could do it from the URL. Create a shortcut, enter the bot URL (bot:checkupdate?client=STAR&SEXP)... What would take many, many lines in HTML and other web coding languages, could be done simply through a URL, and handled by the core application. Instead of, Web interface communicating with the application, instructing the application, waiting for a return from the application, then outputting again. With a URL, you could simply click a button or link, the application would handle it invisibly, and the web interface would do the work its already been designed to do... It's a really, really, really nifty concept...

6

Botdev / Re: Universal Bot: URL Protocol

« on: January 29, 2006, 12:01:46 pm »

I think you guys are thinking a bit too far out of the box here... This protocol idea of mine is intended for control from other applications. Not FULL control... for example,  aim:goim?screenname=SCREENNAME&message=MESSAGE

If you use aim, you probably know there are quite a few different parameters that can be used in it's protocol. I have never heard of REAL exploits being caused from this, as they still continue to use it and add too it.

Why do we add scripting control to our bots? Custom commands? Plugins? So the user can control each little peice more and more. If you think somebody is going to use this protocol for an exploit idea, what the hell do you think scripts could do???

Like I stated zorm, if there were to be a set specification on this protocol, including things like bot identifier, uhm.. web interfacing, bcp integration, botNET integration, etc etc; I think it would be very useful. But I don't think you guys agree, so I'll just use it for my own application. Thought I'd share the idea anyways.

7

Botdev / Re: Universal Bot: URL Protocol

« on: January 28, 2006, 10:15:56 pm »

Not really. Specifications would reveal the entire system to the programmer. If the programmer programs it right, exploits would be of no concern. Don't base that on the general idea.

8

Botdev / Re: Universal Bot: URL Protocol

« on: January 28, 2006, 06:55:30 pm »

I honestly don't see your point?  Why allow the bot to be controlled through a URL query string?

Why not? My point that im proposing is not just for "my" bot.



I'm talking about several bots being able to utilize this bot: protocol. One protocol, that a handful of bots adapt too, is another step in making a greater, more organized and feature friendly community of users. Duh.

9

Botdev / Universal Bot: URL Protocol

« on: January 28, 2006, 06:04:58 pm »

I have taken it upon myself to create a custom URL Protocol Handler for my bot. It allows users to pass command line arguments through a URL. For example, mine is simply "bot:"

By adding arguments to this URL, it can tell the bot what to do when it loads, mine has the current option to do the following:

Enter Ops Mode - Disables all un needed parsing and whatnot. Bot is now a designated Ops Bot.

Enter Silent Mode - Disables all GUI and visual effects. Very useful when combined with Ops Mode for maximum optimization.

So my URL would then be "bot:mode-ops+silent"



This is just an example. If we were to utilize this, our applications could be controlled with alot more power. Think of a WebBot for example. Simply creating a URL to pass to the first bot running on the local system, to do things like "Say" "Ban" "Lookup Profile" etc etc etc.

If we created a uniform specification for this structure, all our bots could utilize this same protocol. It could be extremely bad-ass.

Here is a picture of mine in action:

http://highbrow.no-ip.org/My%20Shared%20Folder/botprotocol.GIF



Feedback?

10

Graphics / Re: My website design > *

« on: January 28, 2006, 02:45:53 pm »

It's different. Perhaps I will keep making other designs, color schemes, etc. Then have a secure popup window upon first entrance of the site (stored via Cookies) to choose a color scheme in a .swf file. It will display low resolution thumbnails of the designs appearance. Then via the login system, they can change the preferences up the display manually. I have done website themes before, they seem to get alot of attention from the user. It's rather simple to implement too, as long as my webserver has enough space for all the extra files :-P

11

Graphics / Re: My website design > *

« on: January 28, 2006, 02:36:21 pm »

Funny... 9 different ip's have requested the image since i posted the link; yet only 2 reply...

Feedback, plz!!!



lol, anyways. Sure, if you can give me ftp access, that would be kickass. I'll contact you about that. Thanks.

12

Graphics / Re: My website design > *

« on: January 27, 2006, 10:06:34 pm »

Trust, since you assume I'm a fag, I think you will have no trouble understanding this phrase.

Blow me.



In other news, The mouse effect was just some test thing, It will be removed before deployment. The loading is extremely optimized, with the one setback I suppose I should have mentioned. I have 128kbps DSL. It sucks ass. I want a real host eventually, But I need to pay bills first. Hence the no-ip domain. The link was long like that, because I just copied it from my Address bar. There are shorter links available, one via a php interface (which will also be used during deployment.) I prefer blue and dark colors alot better than this. But in the competitive field my business will be in, vibrant colors create morse sensual feedback and comfort. I have modified the design to gain more of an impact feel on the end user. It also adds a little more color to the simplistic color scheme. Since I do not have it sliced up yet, here is a preview of what it looks like:

http://highbrow.no-ip.org/My%20Shared%20Folder/images/newlayout.gif

I think I like it.

13

Graphics / My website design > *

« on: January 26, 2006, 05:31:10 pm »

Old school design, created ground up in Photoshop CS and Image Ready. No content as of yet. Just showing design since I used no filters or actions or anything like that. Keep in mind I said old school.

http://highbrow.no-ip.org/My%20Shared%20Folder/

Eat your heart out.

14

Botdev / Re: JBLS Legacy Clients

« on: January 24, 2006, 09:06:19 pm »

I remember the time Battle.net did away with Ops in private channels.. Boy it was UGLY. Servers were splitting every day, channels were empty, total disaster. Well I wasn't doing much chatting on bnet at that time, as I was currently working on my first multi socket bot with proxy support. At the time this happened, it was only logging on as legacy clients. SSHR, DSHR, DRTL... During testing, I had gone into Clan Recruitment, and it too was empty! Except for a few idle bots. These bots were idling messages saying "Come support the war against battle.net! All clans put aside your difference, load EVERY bot you can in Blizzard Tech Support!!" So I go in there, and my channel list goes ape shit. I beleive it was some 46,000 bots in that channel on east. So I said fuck it, lets test my bot out. I loaded up roughly 80 or so legacy clients. They ran for about 4 or 5 days. Then, after coming home from school one day, I noticed all of the bots were gone, except mine... Come to find out, the fools that did that, all got disconnected with cdkey bans to boot. Guess who never got banned? Hehe. So now you know, Legacy clients can be very useful!

15

Introductions! / Re: Yeah so uhm.. hi..

« on: January 24, 2006, 08:52:19 pm »

Oh man... I wish I still had that website... It's funny, I never gave out the link publicly, but in a months time It had gotten hundreds of hits! Seriously. But yeah, in case you feel lonely, I still have those pics of the asses. All 200+ of em. Yeah, I think iago used java to control the minds of the innocent. I for one think it blows and should no longer be used as a programming language. But hey, when it's cross platform, I guess it lives on longer than it should. As for the 15$, You'll get over it. :-p