Velocity
Members
-
Joined
-
Last visited
-
More pictures, those are fucking amazing.
-
This is how Java was made. All done on the TI83+.
-
Parse html parse tags output, what's the advanced part?
-
There is no possible way you can make a bot Wrong. He is right, you've got no idea what's in with creating a bot.
-
http://www.rune-server.org/runescape-development/rs2-client/show-off/508115-converted-317-client-android.html Proof that converting is possible. I'd even be able to but heck, doing that every revision is fucking lots of work.
-
-
If the above image was somehow unclear, this is a written version of the topic: Fresh Account (No tutorial island): 14-Day Membership 1M or 2.40$ USD 28-Day Membership 1.55M or 3.70$ USD 42-Day Membership 2.10M or 5$ USD Tutorial Island Completed Accounts: 14-Day Membership 1.75M or 4.20$ USD 28-Day Membership 2.30M or 5.5$ USD 42-Day Membership 2.85M or 6.8$ USD Bulk is negotiable. All accounts are made on the moment you order them.
-
Doing this allocates more ram for the bot, however I've never seen the bot using more than 500mb of ram so why'd you want to do this? The JVM can perfectly allocate 500MB of ram by itself without specifying any parameters.
-
http://www.howsecureismypassword.net Let alone the salted one.
-
Simple question: which definitions are getting scrambled? I know that object defs are, but what about items/npcs?
-
But why wouldn't a Jagex member know about their own code?
-
Thank you, I was unsure if OSBot had something implemented to combat this. I remember I provided this information to Lazaro before, but didn't know it has been implemented.
-
I just read the topic from Slixz after he has pointed me towards it. I really couldn't believe how many users were just writing down rubbish to top up their post count. His question was a valid one, and in such terms that it made more sense than all the replies he obtained in return. What he was trying to ask was if the client itself was safe to use. How obvious can it be to say 'Yeah, it's never safe. You shouldn't use the crowded spots! '. The login response (the bytes that the client receives when you login) contains a byte that is used in some CS2s ('scripts' that are located inside the cache and are interpret on runtime). This is some example code of the usage of the boolean: if (instruction == 3323) { if (Client.aBool2770) { Class65.cs2ScriptStack[stackPointer++] = 1; } else { Class65.cs2ScriptStack[stackPointer++] = 0; } continue; }Instruction 3323 puts the boolean on the stack. Those scripts are the same ones that determine if the client should forward mouse and camera information to the server. You can name this boolean 'accountFlagged'. Another example of their moves is the one below. It's part of the client that processes a packet, which requests the contents of a method that the game server can specify. How easy could it be to request "org.osbot.Boot" and check if it returns data? They would be capable of instant-banning everyone if they did this. public static void requestClassInformation(Buffer buffer, int var1, byte var2) { ClassInformation var3 = new ClassInformation(); var3.anInt1516 = buffer.readUByte() * -1179448607; var3.anInt1519 = buffer.readInteger() * -626141929; var3.anIntArray1523 = new int[var3.anInt1516 * 636467489]; var3.anIntArray1518 = new int[var3.anInt1516 * 636467489]; var3.aFieldArray1521 = new Field[var3.anInt1516 * 636467489]; var3.anIntArray1520 = new int[var3.anInt1516 * 636467489]; var3.aMethodArray1515 = new Method[var3.anInt1516 * 636467489]; var3.aByteArrayArrayArray1522 = new byte[var3.anInt1516 * 636467489][][]; for (int var4 = 0; var4 < var3.anInt1516 * 636467489; ++var4) { try { int var5 = buffer.readUByte(); String var6; String var7; int var8; if (var5 != 0 && var5 != 1 && var5 != 2) { if (var5 == 3 || var5 == 4) { var6 = new String(buffer.readString()); var7 = new String(buffer.readString()); var8 = buffer.readUByte(); String[] var9 = new String[var8]; for (int var10 = 0; var10 < var8; ++var10) { var9[var10] = new String(buffer.readString()); } byte[][] var18 = new byte[var8][]; int var12; if (var5 == 3) { for (int var11 = 0; var11 < var8; ++var11) { var12 = buffer.readInteger(); var18[var11] = new byte[var12]; buffer.readBytes(var18[var11], 0, var12); } } var3.anIntArray1523[var4] = var5; Class[] var19 = new Class[var8]; for (var12 = 0; var12 < var8; ++var12) { var19[var12] = IsaacCipher.method263(var9[var12], (byte) -35); } var3.aMethodArray1515[var4] = IsaacCipher.method263(var6, (byte) -22).getDeclaredMethod(var7, var19); var3.aByteArrayArrayArray1522[var4] = var18; } } else { var6 = new String(buffer.readString()); var7 = new String(buffer.readString()); var8 = 0; if (var5 == 1) { var8 = buffer.readInteger(); } var3.anIntArray1523[var4] = var5; var3.anIntArray1520[var4] = var8; var3.aFieldArray1521[var4] = IsaacCipher.method263(var6, (byte) -111).getDeclaredField(var7); } } catch (ClassNotFoundException var13) { var3.anIntArray1518[var4] = -1; } catch (SecurityException var14) { var3.anIntArray1518[var4] = -2; } catch (NullPointerException var15) { var3.anIntArray1518[var4] = -3; } catch (Exception var16) { var3.anIntArray1518[var4] = -4; } catch (Throwable var17) { var3.anIntArray1518[var4] = -5; } } Class11.aClass4_49.method53(var3); } Another thing that is remarkable: RuneScape has been encrypting their maps since revision ~370. Maps can only be read when the server sends the XTEA keyset. This is aswell the reason why the community-called 'webwalking' is not available in terms of walking to the end of the map and back. Quite interesting, that RuneScape's EoC client has stopped encrypting these. They apparently are so confident of their abilities of banning bots that they are not afraid anymore to have bots parse the entire map. Just to give you an idea of their current plans and activities. I could provide even more of this information, but I think I have made my point clear. TL;DR version: don't post on a technical subject unless you know what you're talking about.
-
Do you have permission from Xerion? Nope, you do not.
-
Sorry mate, it looked to me like you said "you don't know shit about this" because I hadn't updated this. Misinterpret it, my dearest apologies .
