Universal Bot: URL Protocol

[Newby]

Thats somewhat of the idea, however you can only control the bot on your local computer.

So? You could run the bot as a service, and never have to interface with it outside of a simple web interface it has listening or so.

[Mesiah]

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...

[K20A2]

Sometime a few years back or so I planned on implementing a system like this into my bot.  I don't know about many other users, but using the run dialog in the start menu on Windows is quite convenient, especially if you have hotkeys set up for it.  The idea its self is unique, keep up the good work.

[Sidoh]

I never said it wasn't unique.  I said it was useless.

Honestly, I really see no use in this.  Oh well.  I guess I'm just skeptical.  Have fun anyway! :)

[MyndFyre]

It would be worthwhile if you could implement this protocol to work over IP (such as bot://bot.javaop.com:2047/op?blarg).  But then the question arises as why don't you just use something established such as HTTP?

[Mesiah]

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.

[MyndFyre]

If it is only allowed to be used on the local machine, what good does it do to have a "universal" standard?

[Sidoh]

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.

And people have defended their points each time.  My opinion remains intact.  This is a waste of time.  I'm sure you could think of several better things to do instead of this.

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.

How many bots would actually implement this?  I'd wager that at least 95% of people can figure out how to configure a bot, given the configuration system is intuitive and there is documentation available.  I don't see the purpose in telling a bot to ban something through means of this.  Sure, I suppose it's pretty neat, but it's useless.  Maybe find a better use for something like this?

x86] link=topic=4679.msg53126#msg53126 date=1138746694]
If it is only allowed to be used on the local machine, what good does it do to have a "universal" standard?

Exactly...

[rabbit]

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.

www.javaop.com:8323
Add some links based on flags, bam.

[zorm]

Think of this in the same way that http:// is a link but as bot:// instead. The bot still has to handle to protocol so its infact more coding if you want to do something like have a way for it to fetch a new version byte from BNLS. Having this isn't going to magically make your bot be able to do more with less code. Further more it is exploitable all around, someone can post a link to bot://adduser-zorm-N or however you want to do it and in the event someone with a bot that supports this protocol clicks on it I'll get added with N access.

[Mesiah]

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.

[Sidoh]

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.

No, I'm pretty sure I understand the potential of this.  I'm sorry I'm so skeptical, but I truly feel this isn't a very useful idea. 

If you poke around, you'll find most of our topics are pretty mild-tempered and complimentary.  You just happened to start one that we didn't see much to compliment.

[Joe]

x86] link=topic=4679.msg53016#msg53016 date=1138670846]

Ever wondered what it's like to play a lock, but don't want to start at level 1? You're free to level me if you want~

PS: Get on AIM! =)

Nope, the only time I wondered what it was like to play a warlock was before Closed Beta Push 3, at which point I rolled one.

I can't get on AIM.  Seems like I need to explain this over and over, but most nights I'm at work and have internet, but because of proxy port filtering I can't get on AIM except through HTTP, and I don't want to use Meebo.com like I have on occasion because I don't want them to block that if I absolutely need it.

And stop stalking me to other forums (fora?).

Oh, yeah, I forgot about the whole AIM thing. Anyhow, I'd like a copy of WoW bot as soon as it's stable or whatever. Looks like Sidoh has a copy?

As for the stalking, I didn't go to AoA just because of you. Wait..

[Sidoh]

Oh, yeah, I forgot about the whole AIM thing. Anyhow, I'd like a copy of WoW bot as soon as it's stable or whatever. Looks like Sidoh has a copy?

As for the stalking, I didn't go to AoA just because of you. Wait..

So what if I have a copy?  I'm on the development staff!  (By the way MyndFyre: getting Windows back up and running as we speak).

[Blaze]

Any updates on the unsyncying?  I can't use it for much when it keeps doing that. :P