[Discussion] Ethics

[Robske]

In all honesty I can not be arsed to read all the replies here.
We dont want to see cracks here of any programs like glider, honorbuddy, ebuddy, yourmumbuddy or whatever. For me that means offsets used and source codes as well. I am sure that Apoc wouldnt want the HonorBuddy source code posted here either.
Nor do you guys want the stuff posted in elite memory editing section to be public to all.

I could be misinterpreting what you say here, but does this imply that any offset used in a public/paid hack/bot is not allowed to be posted here? There would be no point to this section if people are allowed to 'patent' their patches/detours like this. I agree that cracks, warez and (reversed/deobfuscated) source code of applications made by this community have no place here, that's only natural. Offsets on the other hand are a completly different matter, we're all working with the same executable, it's perfectly possible that people will find identical solutions to identical problems and they should be able to post their findings here. If that exposes a method used by another hack, that's their problem. I'm also aware that there is no way for the admins to determine how the poster acquired this solution (genuine research or reverse engineering an existing hack)... I have no solution for that.

I know that this isn't what happened with the cheatah incident, just pointing out another likely scenario.

[KuRIoS]

Based on this incident, where it was obvious it was stolen because someone was butthurt

And Robske: Naturally they can not protect offsets and such, but these were given out because of someone ripping the hack apart, not from reversing the client?

[DrakeFish]

@Drakefish: It may be doublestandards, but we are protecting a community and that is how it is done, you dont have to agree, but you have to obey if you wanna be here.
Because it isn't obfuscated well enough it is okay for people to rip and post? By that saying it would be okay for people to break into your home, steal your stuff and sell it on a yardsale next door, simply because your security wasn't good enough.

How comes I gave my opinion in a thread I didn't post in? :confused:

[Cypher]

In all honesty I can not be arsed to read all the replies here.
We dont want to see cracks here of any programs like glider, honorbuddy, ebuddy, yourmumbuddy or whatever. For me that means offsets used and source codes as well. I am sure that Apoc wouldnt want the HonorBuddy source code posted here either.
Nor do you guys want the stuff posted in elite memory editing section to be public to all.

@Drakefish: It may be doublestandards, but we are protecting a community and that is how it is done, you dont have to agree, but you have to obey if you wanna be here.
Because it isn't obfuscated well enough it is okay for people to rip and post? By that saying it would be okay for people to break into your home, steal your stuff and sell it on a yardsale next door, simply because your security wasn't good enough.

Regarding the other thread, it is not a discussion for anyone not being staff so it shouldnt be discussed here, though I can say that I soft deleted it(google that if u dont know what it means) because of reports regarding that thread and users posting stuff from a paid hack (which we dont want - Go to the lowlifers site if you want to use free hacks without supporting the devs).

I don't think that offset dumps classify as a 'crack' or 'warez'. I can certainly see an issue in posting an offset dump of private tools that were shared with you in confidence, but as far as public hacks are concerned, if it's public it's public. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, however I don't think we should have double-standards.

Anyway, it's not like it's hard to dump out that information if you have half a brain. Hooks/modifications are easy to detect and dump with existing tools like HookShark, and function calls (and other modifications) for non-injected hacks can also easily be detected with a simple API hook and memory dump.

I understand that you are enforcing the double-standard as a 'protection' measure, but then that begs the question as to where the line is drawn. What if I independently reverse an offset in WoW then am accused of 'stealing' it from another hack who just happens to implement the same feature.

This is (albeit on a much smaller scale) the reason why software patents are bad. It creates patent trolls and just mess in general. I'm certainly not saying that's what has happened in this case, but once you start 'protecting' certain dumps for public tools, it creates the opportunity for it.

EMU SERVERS: Wouldnt be here if it wasnt for reverse engineering, but does that mean that someone who opens up a succesfull custom made private server should be afraid of having "his" content ripped and posted here for someone else to post? Because his work is based on someone elses then why shouldnt he be the booster for other people as well? Isnt that what is going on with hacks and such?

Cypher and Apoc you know where I am if you wanna discuss it. By all means a crack of HonorBuddy posted on these forums would bring in tonnes more members, so it wouldn't be bad for us. I personally think it is a douchebag move, but if you wanna discuss it then lets go ahead

I'm confused by your remarks on emulated servers. Above you say you support the 'protection' of offset dumps from public hacks, then on the other hand you're saying that it's okay for emu devs to use custom-made code in their own servers? Can you please clarify on that point (in this thread, for the public record), because now I'm confused as to where you actually stand.

How comes I gave my opinion in a thread I didn't post in? :confused:

Obviously Kurios can read your mind.

[jjaa]

Personally i think, if its public then its offsets ect. are considered public. Regardless, if its paid public or free public. However, i disagree with sharing the information in a c/p fashion (like write these bytes to here), as that just encourages people to go make some c/p hack, in which they have nfi how it works. If people want to use other peoples methods, they should reverse it themselves. Alternatively, the reversed information should be shared in way which encourages people to understand what they are doing. For example, a fly hack. Make the client think that the server has the swimming flags enabled, while preventing the server from the receiving the swimming flags. Rather than, write 0x90 to 0xDEADBEEF.

Although that brings up another issue. Where you draw the line at what is considered c/p...

[KuRIoS]

I was on a morphine high when writing this, so granted some didnt make sense, in particular the DrakeFish reference and emu servers :P

How comes I gave my opinion in a thread I didn't post in? :confused:

Meant to say DarkLinux... I must have a secret crush on you :P

I don't think that offset dumps classify as a 'crack' or 'warez'. I can certainly see an issue in posting an offset dump of private tools that were shared with you in confidence, but as far as public hacks are concerned, if it's public it's public. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, however I don't think we should have double-standards.

Anyway, it's not like it's hard to dump out that information if you have half a brain. Hooks/modifications are easy to detect and dump with existing tools like HookShark, and function calls (and other modifications) for non-injected hacks can also easily be detected with a simple API hook and memory dump.

I understand that you are enforcing the double-standard as a 'protection' measure, but then that begs the question as to where the line is drawn. What if I independently reverse an offset in WoW then am accused of 'stealing' it from another hack who just happens to implement the same feature.

This is (albeit on a much smaller scale) the reason why software patents are bad. It creates patent trolls and just mess in general. I'm certainly not saying that's what has happened in this case, but once you start 'protecting' certain dumps for public tools, it creates the opportunity for it.

BUT, by having a paid hack isnt that the same as saying that you trust the people who buy it and they shouldn't share it. I still think that it is a bad and a douchebag move when someone posts info from a hack, not for sharing, but for being butthurt in a previous argument. We all know that this WOULD NOT have happened if it was kynox, cypher or Apoc, etc who had created it and the members here would have frowned upon the "leaker".

Naturally it is okay to post your own findings, but that was far from the case here and you are all well aware of this and as I wrote earlier or have said earlier; I dont know what the history is between darklinux and the creator of cheetah, but I did receive complaints and acted on it.

As far as double-standards, yes it may be so, but that is still how I see it.

I'm confused by your remarks on emulated servers. Above you say you support the 'protection' of offset dumps from public hacks, then on the other hand you're saying that it's okay for emu devs to use custom-made code in their own servers? Can you please clarify on that point (in this thread, for the public record), because now I'm confused as to where you actually stand.

Obviously Kurios can read your mind.

scratch the emu part - it was moreso a topic on STEALING from eachother. I meant that emu servers shouldn't RIP CUSTOM content from eachother. Same as I dont think that bot/hack devs should steal from eachother.

[BoogieManTM]

Personally i think, if its public then its offsets ect. are considered public. Regardless, if its paid public or free public. However, i disagree with sharing the information in a c/p fashion (like write these bytes to here), as that just encourages people to go make some c/p hack, in which they have nfi how it works. If people want to use other peoples methods, they should reverse it themselves. Alternatively, the reversed information should be shared in way which encourages people to understand what they are doing. For example, a fly hack. Make the client think that the server has the swimming flags enabled, while preventing the server from the receiving the swimming flags. Rather than, write 0x90 to 0xDEADBEEF.

Although that brings up another issue. Where you draw the line at what is considered c/p...

I agree. copying (NOT c/p'ing) someone's methods is fair game. Copying someone's implementation isn't cool at all in my book. If you can go through the effort of cracking one of my programs (hypothetically), you can go through the effort of figuring out how I did it and doing it on your own WITHOUT shitting on me.

I understand a lot of people are against selling hacks and that's fine - but there isn't really anything "wrong" with it in a completely logistical sense; I very rarely have time to do this kind of thing anymore (working 60+ hours a week blows :/) and if I want to take away a little money for my efforts then what's the big deal in that? With that in mind I have never made a dime off any hacks/cheats/exploits, but I'd like to someday.

[EDIT]

I have no background information on what actually triggered this particular event (who was involved, etc) - but I have seen plenty of this kind of thing over the years so my response is generic.

[LogicWin]

In all honesty I can not be arsed to read all the replies here.
We dont want to see cracks here of any programs like glider, honorbuddy, ebuddy, yourmumbuddy or whatever. For me that means offsets used and source codes as well. I am sure that Apoc wouldnt want the HonorBuddy source code posted here either.
Nor do you guys want the stuff posted in elite memory editing section to be public to all.

Does a elite section even exists?

[Cypher]

Does a elite section even exists?

​Yes it does.

[suicidity]

​Yes it does.

I'm not elite enough for the elite section

[Serpious]

I am sorry if it's inappropriate to ask this, but what was the original thread about? This thread interests me but it's kind of heard to tag along as much as i'd want when I don't know exactly what the thread in question was about.

I have an idea on what it might have been about, but I just want be sure.

[wraithZX]

Personally I think reverse engineering helps me learn more about systems in general, and in the long run, helps me with my day job.
Whether it's WoW or something else.
I'm sure we're all guilty of a copy/paste here and there... but I sure as hell wouldn't try to sell it afterwards.
But I consider myself more of a hobbyist rather than a profiteer.
I'm much more likely to look at what someone is doing functionality-wise and work it out myself, rather than reverse engineer someone else's hack.

I'm not elite enough for the elite section

Many of us aren't. Then again, you don't just need to be elite, you also need to know how to make a ring0 proxy. :P

[LogicWin]

​Yes it does.

Whats the req? I'm a donator so should be able to enter.

[jjaa]

Whats the req? I'm a donator so should be able to enter.

Its not like the other elite sections. Its an invite only section.

[Bananenbrot]

Personally I think reverse engineering helps me learn more about systems in general, and in the long run, helps me with my day job.
Whether it's WoW or something else.
I'm sure we're all guilty of a copy/paste here and there... but I sure as hell wouldn't try to sell it afterwards.
But I consider myself more of a hobbyist rather than a profiteer.
I'm much more likely to look at what someone is doing functionality-wise and work it out myself, rather than reverse engineer someone else's hack.

That's exactly my point.

Whats the req? I'm a donator so should be able to enter.

Uhmm.. maybe you are required to be an elite member to enter the elite section? Logic wins.
EDIT: Ok, I'm just a stupid leacher who is not well informed about elite sections...