Hello, this is my first post here, I think I really need help, and this is best place to post that :)

In order not to get kicked from game I have to (properly?) respond to warden packets (and pings, of course). This is part where I need help: I can respond ping packets, thats easy, the worst part is warden. I searched a bit, and found no useful information. D2GS Packet Research doesn't even mention 0xAE S -> C packet, and in several topics I read people say that there is no known solution to warden (but, on the other hand, most of these posts were dated march-june 2006)

I tried to receive fake warden packet with redvex to check if each packet gives unique response (so I could make question-answer database), but I was unable to do so (message box limitations).

I hope some of you would know answer to my question :)

There is currently no known way to re-implement warden. So for now, best you can do is have D2 connected to your server and manipulate it to send the warden packets you need.(It's connected to you, when you get a request, send it to d2, and then send the server what d2 sends you)
There are other ways t do this, but each still requires you to run a copy of D2.
~Hdx

[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There is currently no known way to re-implement warden.
[/quote]

Yes there is

[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There are other ways t do this, but each still requires you to run a copy of D2.
[/quote]

This is not true

Thank you Hdx, its not what I really wanted, but its a solution at least. Is it needed to run a copy of d2 for each connection or one can supply information for all?

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171424#msg171424 date=1186499441]
[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There is currently no known way to re-implement warden.
[/quote]

Yes there is

[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There are other ways t do this, but each still requires you to run a copy of D2.
[/quote]

This is not true
[/quote]

Tell us more, I'm afraid telling me that there is known way around warden didn't help me.

[quote author=KrzaQ link=topic=16929.msg171426#msg171426 date=1186501026]
Thank you Hdx, its not what I really wanted, but its a solution at least. Is it needed to run a copy of d2 for each connection or one can supply information for all?

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171424#msg171424 date=1186499441]
[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There is currently no known way to re-implement warden.
[/quote]

Yes there is

[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There are other ways t do this, but each still requires you to run a copy of D2.
[/quote]

This is not true
[/quote]

Tell us more, I'm afraid telling me that there is known way around warden didn't help me.
[/quote]

You'd have to emulate it running it, store a database full of things to respond with for various requests.  Is not as easy as it sounds :)

If an answer "A" is always proper for warden question "B" making a database seems to be pretty good idea. But... Is it?

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171424#msg171424 date=1186499441][quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]There is currently no known way to re-implement warden.[/quote]Yes there is[/quote]Explain, I know how to run the modules, but not how to get them to return proper results yet. And I speak in terms of public domain information.[quote][quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]There are other ways t do this, but each still requires you to run a copy of D2. [/quote]This is not true[/quote]Theres 2^32-1*2^128-1 possible requests/response pairs. The database would be huge. And I never said 1 copy of d2 per connection to d2gs, you can have unlimited connections to d2gs with 1 d2. If you're smart about it.
~Hdx

[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171431#msg171431 date=1186506860]
[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171424#msg171424 date=1186499441][quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]There is currently no known way to re-implement warden.[/quote]Yes there is[/quote]Explain, I know how to run the modules, but not how to get them to return proper results yet. And I speak in terms of public domain information.[quote][quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]There are other ways t do this, but each still requires you to run a copy of D2. [/quote]This is not true[/quote]Theres 2^32-1*2^128-1 possible requests/response pairs. The database would be huge. And I never said 1 copy of d2 per connection to d2gs, you can have unlimited connections to d2gs with 1 d2. If you're smart about it.
~Hdx
[/quote]

I have not seen any public information on how to run the Warden modules, what information do you have?

Meh, I thought others did this as well. When whoever it was said it was raw code that was injected into memory. I wrote a blank PE file and just shoved the module into it. IDA liked it. and I was able to run it. It jsut went boom, I think the error was memory access violation. This was months, deleted it and haven't bothered to look at it sense.
Meh.
~Hdx

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171424#msg171424 date=1186499441]
[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There is currently no known way to re-implement warden.
[/quote]

Yes there is[/quote]Err, no, there isn't.  The best you can do is come up with some static responses.

Since Warden can be updated at any time, I don't think you can fake responses.  At least not for very long, the best you can do is static responses and immediately close if you don't know how to respond.

[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171445#msg171445 date=1186552389]
[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171424#msg171424 date=1186499441]
[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There is currently no known way to re-implement warden.
[/quote]

Yes there is[/quote]Err, no, there isn't.  The best you can do is come up with some static responses.

Since Warden can be updated at any time, I don't think you can fake responses.  At least not for very long, the best you can do is static responses and immediately close if you don't know how to respond.
[/quote]

According to what Hdx wrote, there are almost 2^160 variants of "questions", resposne database would be really huge (unless, BN uses, say, only 200 "questions")


I'm not very skilled nor experienced programmer and I would like to get some help how to make diablo make responses for my bots... Should I try to make my own GS, which, with running Diablo II, would be acting as "warden response server", or shall I try to inject directly to diablo and receive fake packets, or something I have not mentioned here?

[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171445#msg171445 date=1186552389]
[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171424#msg171424 date=1186499441]
[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There is currently no known way to re-implement warden.
[/quote]

Yes there is[/quote]Err, no, there isn't.  The best you can do is come up with some static responses.

Since Warden can be updated at any time, I don't think you can fake responses.  At least not for very long, the best you can do is static responses and immediately close if you don't know how to respond.
[/quote]

Considering I know someone who has done it and have explained it to me how it works, I think I'll go with what I say, thanks.

Who are you?

I don't want to be rude, but if you are not going to share your information with us, whats the point of posting here?

Bt the way, how long can I stay ingame ignoring warden?

[quote author=KrzaQ link=topic=16929.msg171461#msg171461 date=1186611486]
I don't want to be rude, but if you are not going to share your information with us, whats the point of posting here?

Bt the way, how long can I stay ingame ignoring warden?
[/quote]
My tests with WoW have indicated 3 minutes.  Independent information about D2 is 45 seconds.

[quote author=KrzaQ link=topic=16929.msg171461#msg171461 date=1186611486]
I don't want to be rude, but if you are not going to share your information with us, whats the point of posting here?

Bt the way, how long can I stay ingame ignoring warden?
[/quote]

I've never been one to release stuff to the public for about the past six years that I've been around.  My view on things is: why work hard on something but just give away to others for nothing when nobody ever gives credit or appreciates it :)

I love to share, just when it comes to this particular subject it doesn't work that way.

I don't have code for this, I was just told information about how it works and things it does/can do by someone else.

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171459#msg171459 date=1186609804]
[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171445#msg171445 date=1186552389]
[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171424#msg171424 date=1186499441]
[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171423#msg171423 date=1186497862]
There is currently no known way to re-implement warden.
[/quote]

Yes there is[/quote]Err, no, there isn't.  The best you can do is come up with some static responses.

Since Warden can be updated at any time, I don't think you can fake responses.  At least not for very long, the best you can do is static responses and immediately close if you don't know how to respond.
[/quote]

Considering I know someone who has done it and have explained it to me how it works, I think I'll go with what I say, thanks.

Who are you?[/quote]It doesn't matter who I am.

If you're going to argue, you actually need to give me something to argue with (don't just say you're right because your friend says so).

Actually, all UL really has to do is ask who you are, since he's pretty much done everything.  Twice.

If UL says he's done it, than I wouldn't argue with him about it. I would just agree and move onto something else. Odds are he has done it or knows how it's done, so argueing with him about it is rather pointless.

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171463#msg171463 date=1186614126]I've never been one to release stuff to the public for about the past six years that I've been around.  My view on things is: why work hard on something but just give away to others for nothing when nobody ever gives credit or appreciates it :)[/quote]
So we are all guilty of not giving credit or appreciating it?

I don't think this person wants me to reveal who he is, probably due to the fact that he doesn't want a bunch of people pestering him about this.

If they tell me it's ok, I'll post who it is.  They are a member of this forum, but do not post very much recently.

Like I said, I do not have code for it but I have the basic idea behind it all...and to make it clear you do not need the game running for this.

although i'm sure i know who you're talking about, basic ideas only get you so far

Jeez, UL, you know, KrazyQ is actually kind of right. Why even say anything about it if you're not going to contribute... ::)
Sure, maybe people don't give enough credit, but honestly. Look at lockdown checkrevision, everyone knows who solved it. So why would anyone even need to give credit? It goes without saying who solved this-or-that or whatever, since people make a big enough stink about it. I take it you're not much of a supporter of free software.

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171500#msg171500 date=1186811989]
I don't think this person wants me to reveal who he is, probably due to the fact that he doesn't want a bunch of people pestering him about this.

If they tell me it's ok, I'll post who it is.  They are a member of this forum, but do not post very much recently.

Like I said, I do not have code for it but I have the basic idea behind it all...and to make it clear you do not need the game running for this.
[/quote]It's clearly Thing.



Or Skywing.











Or Topaz.


















No wait, it's Bacca!

No, it's none of them and I dont think you would guess it.  I don't support open sourced, why spend hours working on something to just give away to hungry newbs begging for code.  We all seen it here in this community.  It was bad enough when CupHead released CleanSlateBot, nobody could even figure that out and they still wanted help.

Brew, it's clear your for open source stuff for obvious reasons.

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171513#msg171513 date=1186873834]
Brew, it's clear your for open source stuff for obvious reasons.
[/quote]
What are my obvious reasons, then? I, myself, have absolutely no interest in diablo 2's warden system. But I ask you make it open source anyways. Why is this? Because I, and many others, believe information should be free. That's the basis of open source/free software, not just me. Actually, many more people support open source then you think. We're the majority. If you want to hold back your information, your seekret pattern of ones and zeros, go ahead, people will just think of you as that kind of person. But that's O.K., why should you care? am i right?

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171513#msg171513 date=1186873834]No, it's none of them and I dont think you would guess it.  I don't support open sourced, why spend hours working on something to just give away to hungry newbs begging for code.  We all seen it here in this community.  It was bad enough when CupHead released CleanSlateBot, nobody could even figure that out and they still wanted help.[/quote]You can't say "Oh yeah, I can emulate Warden."  Then turn around and say "No, just believe me--I can't tell you how I did it, I just did."

You can't emulate Warden.  However, you can give static responses to specific queries, but you cannot emulate it.  It needs to be constantly updated.  As far as I know, anyway.

It's possible to emulate it. I poked it with a stick today. It bit me a few times. But it dosen't seem to difficult. I got some ideas to test before I can say anything conclusive. But that'll come next time I get bored of twixing my nether ;)
I find it funny that the guy who shoots to the top of my list isnt even on yours FoFo...
Meh.
~Hdx

brew, since you're so into the open source movement, I assume that you also use Linux. Is that right?

this thread sums up years of horrible battle net community drama, all in one. sometimes you think you know how a certain type of individual would act in certain situations - most of the time you're right, if you've been there yourself. so, when people begin to break these trends, and molds, you begin to wonder things.

;D

[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171517#msg171517 date=1186890209]
[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171513#msg171513 date=1186873834]No, it's none of them and I dont think you would guess it.  I don't support open sourced, why spend hours working on something to just give away to hungry newbs begging for code.  We all seen it here in this community.  It was bad enough when CupHead released CleanSlateBot, nobody could even figure that out and they still wanted help.[/quote]You can't say "Oh yeah, I can emulate Warden."  Then turn around and say "No, just believe me--I can't tell you how I did it, I just did."

You can't emulate Warden.  However, you can give static responses to specific queries, but you cannot emulate it.  It needs to be constantly updated.  As far as I know, anyway.
[/quote]

Wrooong

I really wonder whether some people even know who you are sometimes.  It confounds me.  And brew, people like UL keep their stuff private for good reasons, such as not getting sued by big corporations or having douchebags rip their sources and call it their own.

[quote author=rabbit link=topic=16929.msg171526#msg171526 date=1186927394]
I really wonder whether some people even know who you are sometimes.  It confounds me.  And brew, people like UL keep their stuff private for good reasons, such as not getting sued by big corporations or having douchebags rip their sources and call it their own.
[/quote]

qft

More annoying than FOSS/closed-source are people who think that either is a universal solution.

Also, I do want to point out that IIRC UL shares his sources with people he trusts such as Arta or Yoni.  I don't think he'd give anything to iago though, cause iago would go spam it OPENSOURCEBITCHES haha.  Anyway, I do know that UL eventually releases some of his stuff to some people.

[quote author=Yegg link=topic=16929.msg171519#msg171519 date=1186894427]
brew, since you're so into the open source movement, I assume that you also use Linux. Is that right?
[/quote]
Actually, yes. I do use Arch (0.8 voodoo) and ubuntu.
I also use Unix. (I'm a FreeBSD user, in fact I prefer it over linux)

[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171517#msg171517 date=1186890209]
[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171513#msg171513 date=1186873834]No, it's none of them and I dont think you would guess it.  I don't support open sourced, why spend hours working on something to just give away to hungry newbs begging for code.  We all seen it here in this community.  It was bad enough when CupHead released CleanSlateBot, nobody could even figure that out and they still wanted help.[/quote]You can't say "Oh yeah, I can emulate Warden."  Then turn around and say "No, just believe me--I can't tell you how I did it, I just did."

You can't emulate Warden.  However, you can give static responses to specific queries, but you cannot emulate it.  It needs to be constantly updated.  As far as I know, anyway.
[/quote]

Then how does Starcraft know? It's obviously getting the information on how to act on these updates on-the-fly as a hotfix.

Learn how this works, and you hold the key to implementing Warden. This requires an extensive understanding of Warden.

Unless of course, UserLoser and Co. have devised a black magic method that I don't know about =).

Just saying, learn to think outside the box.

I wrote an entire BNCS/MCP login framework in Java, and it's entirely open-sourced, but I'm mostly with UL on this one.

My justification is that I didn't release anything algorithmically new - my bot depends pretty intimately on the JBLS library, which is existing free software -- and despite a number of differences I have from Hdx's programming style, I think it was very well written. I chose Java because I wanted to develop on Windows, hold ops on my Linux server, and be able to use it on my Macbook when I'm on the go. Since then, Windows decided to go on vacation with my hard drive and the two of them never came back, so now I'm primarily using Ubuntu - ReiserFS is super fast, but that's a discussion for another day. I chose to make the source open because I wanted people to be able to contribute. In the event that someone actually does try to rip it off, they'll probably just end up making themselves look like the idiot anyways, because it's such a unique project.

I don't like the idea that someone would release a work-around to warden as open-source software, because it directly contradicts the spirit of Warden's implementation - to protect the game. I don't care that there are an infinite number of open source checkrevision algorithms out there because, while I hate the seemingly endless number of spam bots that are out there, I believe the community as a whole is responsible enough to have these algorithms.

I would draw the line somewhere between JBLS and the CSB module. JBLS gets my approval because it's just an open-source BNLS (except W3 works). CSB does not because it takes a task that I believe should require a brain, and grants everyone with a copy of Visual Basic the ability to write a spam bot. CSB isn't even open-source AFAIK, it's just a publicly available module.

Also, knowing nothing about warden, I can say with absolute confidence that UL is correct. No matter how dificult it is to reproduce, it's not infinitely complex. If D2 can calculate warden responses, it can be emulated, period. Warden can only be as complicated as its algorithm; determine the algorithm, and you can reproduce it.

[offtopic]
I would like to see your framework, both because I want see your implementation of the MCP (Hey i'm lazy and i'm only like 1/3rd the way done)
And 2) I want to see how you use JBLS 0.o
~Hdx
[/offtopic]

[quote author=Warrior link=topic=16929.msg171534#msg171534 date=1186986307][quote]You can't emulate Warden.  However, you can give static responses to specific queries, but you cannot emulate it.  It needs to be constantly updated.  As far as I know, anyway.
[/quote]Then how does Starcraft know?[/quote]I don't get it...?  How does Starcraft know what?  Do you mean, how to reply to a Warden request?  Well, it doesn't.  Warden is binary code executed on the client and it sends whatever information it needs to back to Blizzard.  This can change at any time without a client side patch.  Meaning, you cannot emulate it in any way I've heard of or can imagine (unless you're running a client somewhere).

[quote]Also, knowing nothing about warden, I can say with absolute confidence that UL is correct. No matter how dificult it is to reproduce, it's not infinitely complex. If D2 can calculate warden responses, it can be emulated, period. Warden can only be as complicated as its algorithm; determine the algorithm, and you can reproduce it.[/quote]That's the thing--Warden is not an algorithm.  Warden is binary code executed on the client.  Blizzard could send you new Warden data any time it wants, doing anything it wants to the client.  Warden could do anything client side, you cannot emulate that unless you're using an actual Diablo II client.

[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171538#msg171538 date=1186999211]
Warden is not an algorithm.  Warden is binary code executed on the client.
[/quote]It's official.  You're retarded.  You have lost.  Please leave.

[quote author=rabbit link=topic=16929.msg171540#msg171540 date=1187008325]
[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171538#msg171538 date=1186999211]
Warden is not an algorithm.  Warden is binary code executed on the client.
[/quote]It's official.  You're retarded.  You have lost.  Please leave.
[/quote]
You're retarded. Have you forgotten the contents of a warden module already?

[quote author=brew link=topic=16929.msg171541#msg171541 date=1187014163]
[quote author=rabbit link=topic=16929.msg171540#msg171540 date=1187008325]
[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171538#msg171538 date=1186999211]
Warden is not an algorithm.  Warden is binary code executed on the client.
[/quote]It's official.  You're retarded.  You have lost.  Please leave.
[/quote]
You're retarded. Have you forgotten the contents of a warden module already?
[/quote]You fail worse than Insolence.

How did insolence fail? I think he means that Warden cannot be summed up into one single algorithm. It's not as simple as Camel makes it sound. Camel has the right idea, though. Everyone here is correct in their own argument. I know who UserLoser is speaking about, and I also can verify that he has a Warden implementation. I've never seen it in action, and can't truly verify, but I have no reason to doubt him.

[quote author=Hdx link=topic=16929.msg171536#msg171536 date=1186992045]
[offtopic]
I would like to see your framework, both because I want see your implementation of the MCP (Hey i'm lazy and i'm only like 1/3rd the way done)
And 2) I want to see how you use JBLS 0.o
~Hdx
[/offtopic]
[/quote]http://bnubot.net/
My MCP connection class is close enough to complete to log on to a character, but the GUI plugin that you use to control it will automatically pick the character closest to expiring to log on to.

[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171538#msg171538 date=1186999211][quote]Also, knowing nothing about warden, I can say with absolute confidence that UL is correct. No matter how dificult it is to reproduce, it's not infinitely complex. If D2 can calculate warden responses, it can be emulated, period. Warden can only be as complicated as its algorithm; determine the algorithm, and you can reproduce it.[/quote]That's the thing--Warden is not an algorithm.  Warden is binary code executed on the client.  Blizzard could send you new Warden data any time it wants, doing anything it wants to the client.  Warden could do anything client side, you cannot emulate that unless you're using an actual Diablo II client.[/quote]
It is still an algorithm; there are limits to what the binary code the server sends you can possibly do, even if those limits have enormous boundaries, they're not infinite, and therefore there must be more than one possible solution. Am I wrong?

I'm never going to attempt to reverse Warden, but if I were, I would start by learning what the boundaries of the executable code are. Since it is essentially raw machine code, it sounds those boundaries are very wide. It should be safe to assume that the warden code will only do things like look at the running process memory, and look for external hacks. Since your warden re-implementation won't look for external hacks - it wouldn't make much sense to re-implement it legitimately, although you could - you only need to know what a running Diablo 2 process looks like.

Having done this for close to eight years now, I've learned that most things can be implemented in a simpler way than their worst case solution. I can't think of a simpler solution, but I'd be shocked if no one on this forum could.

[quote author=rabbit link=topic=16929.msg171540#msg171540 date=1187008325]
[quote author=Insolence link=topic=16929.msg171538#msg171538 date=1186999211]
Warden is not an algorithm.  Warden is binary code executed on the client.
[/quote]It's official.  You're retarded.  You have lost.  Please leave.
[/quote]

Hmm, last time I checked warden was binary code that's executed by the client. 

With that said I'm sure that there are currently workarounds for warden.  They also (unless someone has done a whole lot of work) aren't foolproof solutions.  A static database of responses seems to be the only viable route (other than correctly implementing a client that appears exactly the same as an official one - which would be pretty pointless).  Warden is extensible enough that changes could be implemented that would seriously break a database of static responses.  Sure, you could then add the correct responses to your database but that's a very inefficient way of going about things.

My solution (Diablo II only but it could be implemented for other clients as well) involves connecting an instance of the Diablo II client to my own 'game server'.  Warden packets are forwarded to the client and its responses are forwarded to battlenet.  This isn't a foolproof solution either, but it seems to be more durable than a static database.  The single client instance can be used for any number of pseudo-clientless bots so it's not an extremely bulky solution either.  This same method can also be implemented for pathing and any other functions you don't wish to reverse.

Oh dear god, Camel...haha.  Been a while now since we've seen you here...weren't you banned?  :o

Temporarily. Then immediately after I founded Open BnetDocs, and it became permanent. I'm not actually sure if they were related, but I assumed they were, so I lost interest in this community for a long time. At that time, it was tabu to release anything unless you had a [vL] tag in your account. I'm glad to see that has changed.

Well, I don't really think it's changed so much as they don't have time to do anything about it anymore :P

[quote author=Camel link=topic=16929.msg171569#msg171569 date=1187080861]
Temporarily. Then immediately after I founded Open BnetDocs, and it became permanent. I'm not actually sure if they were related, but I assumed they were, so I lost interest in this community for a long time. At that time, it was tabu to release anything unless you had a [vL] tag in your account. I'm glad to see that has changed.
[/quote]

I've been around here still, never left.  I did delete my account then come back...should have like 4k posts by now if I kept it...anyways, I have not done any work or any bots lately at all...in past year or two?  I did reverse bnupdate for fun though

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171593#msg171593 date=1187147392]
[quote author=Camel link=topic=16929.msg171569#msg171569 date=1187080861]
Temporarily. Then immediately after I founded Open BnetDocs, and it became permanent. I'm not actually sure if they were related, but I assumed they were, so I lost interest in this community for a long time. At that time, it was tabu to release anything unless you had a [vL] tag in your account. I'm glad to see that has changed.
[/quote]

I've been around here still, never left.  I did delete my account then come back...should have like 4k posts by now if I kept it...anyways, I have not done any work or any bots lately at all...in past year or two?  I did reverse bnupdate for fun though
[/quote]

You deleted your account? Didn't Grok ban your account for some reason? Or what was that all about (it was a while ago)?

[quote author=Yegg link=topic=16929.msg171595#msg171595 date=1187156337]
[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=16929.msg171593#msg171593 date=1187147392]
[quote author=Camel link=topic=16929.msg171569#msg171569 date=1187080861]
Temporarily. Then immediately after I founded Open BnetDocs, and it became permanent. I'm not actually sure if they were related, but I assumed they were, so I lost interest in this community for a long time. At that time, it was tabu to release anything unless you had a [vL] tag in your account. I'm glad to see that has changed.
[/quote]

I've been around here still, never left.  I did delete my account then come back...should have like 4k posts by now if I kept it...anyways, I have not done any work or any bots lately at all...in past year or two?  I did reverse bnupdate for fun though
[/quote]

You deleted your account? Didn't Grok ban your account for some reason? Or what was that all about (it was a while ago)?
[/quote]

Both, but ban was temporarly I believe

IIRC, someone banned your account but not your IP address, so you created something like "UserLoser-"