Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Actually everything is trash when it comes to binding files.

You may find a great code obfuscation but it won't stop anybody to distribute it across the net, but will stop them editing it etc.

Posted (edited)

dont buy anything related with l2scripts or strixguard , they both have trojan backdoors, scripts used it on akumu/pcoder(smartguard) and retrived sources of his smartguard, and based "their" protection on it. They can easly do the same to anyone else and get any kind of information/data, or pass from your data center and u wouldn't even know, so better use something like ActiveAnticheat or custom protection.

 

Edited by LightFusionMain
Posted
2 hours ago, SGuard said:

xxdem, public send it and I'll prove you wrong.

 

I am pretty sure its possible, with OpenFile and ReadFile exploit

Posted
16 hours ago, LightFusionMain said:

dont buy anything related with l2scripts or strixguard , they both have trojan backdoors, scripts used it on akumu/pcoder(smartguard) and retrived sources of his smartguard, and based "their" protection on it. They can easly do the same to anyone else and get any kind of information/data, or pass from your data center and u wouldn't even know, so better use something like ActiveAnticheat or custom protection.

 

We do you get that information lol? 

How much they pay you for a single false claim?

What you're talking now is exactly smartguard work style, having screenshots of people's desktop or having file access by terms of use (just read them).

There's a discussion about 'file access' in our thread with that guy (forgot his name, he tried to do a protection awhile ago), and there's an explanation about limitation that we pose regarding file access. 

You should do ur research better, man. 

 

and OMG, how could we get smart's files without having a protection first? Bullshit is in the air.

 

And we don't have any trojan lol, if we do, file a claim in microsoft, since we're certificated with them our code is crystal clean by all standards. 

 

Do your homework before posting obvious lies.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, SGuard said:

We do you get that information lol? 

How much they pay you for a single false claim?

What you're talking now is exactly smartguard work style, having screenshots of people's desktop or having file access by terms of use (just read them).

There's a discussion about 'file access' in our thread with that guy (forgot his name, he tried to do a protection awhile ago), and there's an explanation about limitation that we pose regarding file access. 

You should do ur research better, man. 

 

and OMG, how could we get smart's files without having a protection first? Bullshit is in the air.

 

And we don't have any trojan lol, if we do, file a claim in microsoft, since we're certificated with them our code is crystal clean by all standards. 

 

Do your homework before posting obvious lies.

hah obvious lies ?

U(or Юрий https://bit.ly/2qFtpTT ) posted topic on zone-game.info describing conversation between akumu and pcoder (from fake account) u also posted partial source code of Adrenaline.

U are using guard.des(sources old version)  stolen from akumu( as he described it in one of post's not so long ago - here https://bit.ly/2OD7wy4  ) 

I clearly know what i'm saying, your certificate doesn't prove anything, u could allways download and execute non certified app , via your guard.des, u only got certf on your .exe , keep fooling people somewhere else, don't use his trojan protection !

 

Edited by LightFusionMain

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Posts

    • LIVE VERIFICATION? SUMSUB? “IMPOSSIBLE”? ▪ Spoiler: it is possible — if you know who to work with. A client came in with a task to pass **live verification** on **WantToPay**, a Telegram virtual card service. On the platform side — **Sumsub**: liveness check, SMS, manual review. “Fast” and “by eye” simply don’t work here. › What was done: → analyzed the verification scenario and Sumsub requirements → built the correct flow: phone number, email, timing → **completed live verification remotely, without account handover** → handled SMS and confirmation codes → brought the process to final approval ▪ Result: → verification passed → access granted → no flags or repeat requests ▪ Live verification is not luck. It’s scenario-based preparation — not hope. › TG: @mustang_service ( https:// t.me/ mustang_service ) › Channel: Mustang Service ( https:// t.me/ +6RAKokIn5ItmYjEx ) *All data is published with the client’s consent.* #verification #sumsub #livecheck #kyc #case
    • IMPORTANT INFO: In a few days, I will switch to completely new code, written from scratch with a new download system, patch building and management system. The Updater will become true 2026 code with "foolproof systems". I'm going to create a Discord server for customers to request new ideas and features. FIRST CUSTOMERS ARE ALREADY USING THE NEW UPDATER ON LIVE SERVERS! Watch this topic for upcoming info because the new updater is around the corner! Yes, you can still use self-update on the previous updater! No, the new updater won't be compatible with the old patch system! A new build is required, but players who already have game files won't have to download the entire patch again! New templates and updates to existing templates are coming soon! Sneak peek:  
    • i used guytis IL project and source. i found in his project there are 3 Client version source... 1,CliExt_H5   --->this one cant be compiled in VS2005,i did know why..is it for H5 client? 2,CliExtNew  --->this one is IL version ,but when i compiled it and use it.player cant login game,MD5Checksum wrong.i check the source code,but not found any hints. 3,L2Server    --->this one for HB client?im not sure...   so my question is what are the differences between these three versions of cliext.dll?how can i fix the issue of the MD5Checksum not matching problem?   01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, [CCliExt::HandleCheckSum] Invalid Checksum[1130415144] vs [-721420287] packet[dd] len[29] sum[2698] key[30] HWID[] Account[]! 01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, SocketLimiter::UserSocketBadunknownprotocol 11111111111 01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, [usersocket]unknown protocol from ip[113.137.149.115]!      
    • ## [1.4.1] - 2026-01-29   ### ✨ New Features - **Short Description**: Server owners can add a short tagline (up to 240 characters) on the server info page, under the "Online" status. It appears in the server list (By Votes) for VIP, Gold VIP, and Pinned servers so players see a brief summary at a glance.   ### 🔄 Improvements - **Server Info Page**: Description field is limited to 3000 characters with a character counter; the textarea is vertically resizable. A second **Save Changes** button was added at the bottom (after the description) for easier saving. - **Server Name**: In My Servers → Edit, the server name is read-only and can no longer be changed (avoids accidental changes and naming conflicts). - **Server Rows (By Votes)**: Short descriptions wrap correctly and no longer affect row height; long text is clipped to two lines so the list stays tidy and consistent.   ---
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This community uses essential cookies to function properly. Non-essential cookies and third-party services are used only with your consent. Read our Privacy Policy and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..