Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Are you going to b1tch everyone's work please? I do not want to take action. Youve done nothing better than him. You are not in charge in here to say whats right and whats wrong.

Posted

im talking to you? ......bro first learn the l2 and after talk......

 

everyone can have customs in serv ..yes but dont call it exploit

 

did you understand english or not?

 

last post by me in this top

 

for me takle or not act is same ;)

Posted

im talking to you? ......bro first learn the l2 and after talk......

 

everyone can have customs in serv ..yes but dont call it exploit

 

did you understand english or not?

 

last post by me in this top

 

for me takle or not act is same ;)

i say to you to go into exploits sections

read all exploits by me,noble,fakoykas dn other from staff...

You call them customs yeah?

Posted

Rofl if that's not an exploit then what is it? Is that happening on official? In most of the servers (i don't wanna say to all) that's illegal and that's because many people cannot fix it. Intrepid shares it, if you don't like it you can leave the topic immediately. Stop the flaming now cause the next time you'll get a -1.

Posted

If anyone find intrepids shares/other ppl shares or this one sucky , den shut the -beep- up and dont post .. im not gonna tolerate this anymore

Posted

that's awesome.

I give you +1 karma for all your shares

i think you deserve it.

You make day by day java shares ( fixes, addons etc.)

Good Job Continue The Good Work!

Posted

After tests as i said to intrepid that's not a fix! Try it and you'll see you can have prefrenzy, etc. I'm trying to find an alternative way.

 

Locked till Intrepid finds another way to fix that.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • 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]!      
  • 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..