Publishing Global Offset XML File?

[Viano]

Hi everyone,

what do you think about publishing a global XML file (or s.th. similar) with needed offsets for each patch on a public web server and using that in all our private bots? The bot could connect automatically to the web server (+ several backup locations, maybe Rapidshare or some kind of Subversion server) and download the XML file after each patch without even pausing for too long. Of course some maintainers of the file should be chosen and offsets needed should be defined

I personally think that would make things a lot easier if people are not working with FindPattern() or the idea could be used for publishing patterns.

[Apoc]

Hi everyone,

what do you think about publishing a global XML file (or s.th. similar) with needed offsets for each patch on a public web server and using that in all our private bots? The bot could connect automatically to the web server (+ several backup locations, maybe Rapidshare or some kind of Subversion server) and download the XML file after each patch without even pausing for too long. Of course some maintainers of the file should be chosen and offsets needed should be defined

I personally think that would make things a lot easier if people are not working with FindPattern() or the idea could be used for publishing patterns.

Why would we do that? So you can be more lazy, and use our resources?

Though, I'll think about it (and may put one up soon)

[~OddBall~]

Why would we do that? So you can be more lazy, and use our resources?

Though, I'll think about it (and may put one up soon)

this is cool logic

[UnknOwned]

Why would we do that? So you can be more lazy, and use our resources?

Though, I'll think about it (and may put one up soon)

I think its a pretty interesting idea tbh.
Not only to avoid the "what was that offset" etc but i'm sure it could help a lot of people who might not have the knowledge about wow as some of us who have been around for years.

[Robske]

I'd rather not rely on third party for this. The leeching this promotes isn't exactly appealing either. Besides, it's a 30 minute job on max if you do everything by hand...

Can't wait till someone gets hold of that server and changes a pointer though (End of Text address comes to mind)

Edit: I am afraid that this will change the questions from "whats the G_ClientConnection offset" to "how do I use the G_ClientConnection offset"

[Viano]

Why would we do that? So you can be more lazy, and use our resources?

Though, I'll think about it (and may put one up soon)

Sigh. Yes it was totally an attempt to abuse this and be more lazy That is why I started to learning C++, Reversing and bought all those books.

But if I think about this much longer ... yes, it is for being lazy. Programmers have to be lazy, you Apoc are lazy and come up with your brilliant code every now and then. And this code is good because you are lazy.

Then at least provide the XML file for your private elite, pro, groovy section and host the file only for the members who are at no cost leechers ... and for me so I can be lazy and for the idea

[UnknOwned]

I'd rather not rely on third party for this. The leeching this promotes isn't exactly appealing either. Besides, it's a 30 minute job on max if you do everything by hand...

Can't wait till someone gets hold of that server and changes a pointer though (End of Text address comes to mind)

Edit: I am afraid that this will change the questions from "whats the G_ClientConnection offset" to "how do I use the G_ClientConnection offset"

Its not about to rely on third party, i mean this is for people who don't know how to find this stuff them selves or people who want to save themselves that 30 minute job and just go check if the ones in the list is correct.

And again about "whats the G_ClientConnection offset", you will eventually see that no matter what. If you look through the current threads we got more requests for exact offsets than "how to use".

Most importaintly it will make consistency in structures and naming, things like; currently we got 30 diffrent names for G_ClientConnection (when you look back at legacy posts) and telling people to "use the search" will end up having them going through google and guessing the correct term that was used in that path's Offset SumUp Thread.

Having it all streamlined will reduce much of that confusion and alot of spam.

twocents

[FenixTX2]

will end up having them going through google and guessing the correct term

Have you been spying on me?
One thing I think might be helpful is a patch-time-span break down. I sometimes come accross interesting looking posts with out of date offsets. It takes a while to update them when I don't know which version to open with IDA.

[ostapus]

Its not about to rely on third party, i mean this is for people who don't know how to find this stuff them selves or people who want to save themselves that 30 minute job and just go check if the ones in the list is correct.

And again about "whats the G_ClientConnection offset", you will eventually see that no matter what. If you look through the current threads we got more requests for exact offsets than "how to use".

Most importaintly it will make consistency in structures and naming, things like; currently we got 30 diffrent names for G_ClientConnection (when you look back at legacy posts) and telling people to "use the search" will end up having them going through google and guessing the correct term that was used in that path's Offset SumUp Thread.

Having it all streamlined will reduce much of that confusion and alot of spam.

twocents

excellent point UnknOwned, "standartizing" names will be huge benefit.

[EmilyStrange]

I like the idea of the XML file, or some other easily accessible resource.

Yes, the lazy part of me kicks in and thinks this would make my life easier, but frankly I am more for it for just a standardized naming convention on all of the pointers, offsets, structures and enumerations. It is a bit of a nightmare performing searches through the forum archives, or trying to figure out that "CacheNamePointer" is also "STATIC_PLAYER_CACHE."

A simple HTML web-form that lets people enter a name, offset/pointer/enum value/bit-mask and store the the data in a database for a particular client version. And finally, another web page that can spit that data out as XML, C++, C# or whatever would make life a lot easier for many people, not just the leechers.

[EmilyStrange]

If it was done here on MMOWNED, you could also add to a forum member's reputation whenever they post an update that is verified correct by other forum members.

[Apoc]

I like the idea of the XML file, or some other easily accessible resource.

Yes, the lazy part of me kicks in and thinks this would make my life easier, but frankly I am more for it for just a standardized naming convention on all of the pointers, offsets, structures and enumerations. It is a bit of a nightmare performing searches through the forum archives, or trying to figure out that "CacheNamePointer" is also "STATIC_PLAYER_CACHE."

A simple HTML web-form that lets people enter a name, offset/pointer/enum value/bit-mask and store the the data in a database for a particular client version. And finally, another web page that can spit that data out as XML, C++, C# or whatever would make life a lot easier for many people, not just the leechers.

That's actually a really good idea...

/me gets to work on a P.O.C. system...

[wraithZX]

Make sure you put in the ability to submit function prototypes in full. That is going to be most useful, not silly offsets.

[adaephon]

Something along the lines of pinvoke.net for WoW offsets - structures (descriptors as structs, enums), class names and layouts etc (with possible aliases and the ability to search) as well as offsets and version history, and function prototypes etc like wraith said

[EmilyStrange]

Finding offsets and updates is reasonably trivial if you have the proper tools, once you have located them the first time, or had someone show you how to locate them, but I am never sure if I should post my own in case they conflict or I tread on someone's toes (people can be a bit sensitive around here if you duplicate information already posted).

But at least, if there were an easily accessible database, I could enter my data in to the database or compare what I have found against somebody elses entries to confirm we are both looking at the same data.

It may transpire, however doubtfully, that I am tracking memory locations that other people aren't because I find them useful -- I don't have a bot, but I do have a multiboxing tool that lets me efficiently control a party or raid of characters.