MySEQ - Is it open source? Should a precompiled version continue to be released?

[Stogar]

With all the things happening lately some questions have been brought up about pre-compiled versions of these types of apps.

SEQ has never been released in a ready to run version, when Macroquest was the devs changed it so that it'd be very difficult to make a generic ready to run version.

Trainers are also available ready to run.

My personal opinion is that making a version easy to get and use will get it into more people's hands who will abuse it.

My question's are:

Is MySEQ still open source? And if it is open source then what do all the devs think about it being released pre-compiled?

The CVS appears to be a bit out of date:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/seq/myseq/server/
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/seq/myseq/client/

If this project is hosted on sourceforge and opensource then I think the CVS needs to be current so we can check in and out. If I wanted to post some changes I made to the source, where would I do it with the current version?

I'm not saying anything against MQSEQ2's work, it's great and kept the project alive.

I think with the way things are, it's time to get back to adhearing to the opensource model for one. And to take example from MQ2 and SEQ and no longer release binaries.

It would probably be a good idea to make the break from under SEQ and setup our own sourceforge site.

I know this will probably be a heated topic, and I am bringing it up for discussion nothing more.

[MQSEQ2]

I created the myseqproject.sourceforge.net site (last week) but haven't done anything with it since this isn't my project. we can move there anytime .

We currently don't use CVS with the project since prior to this month we didn't have access to the CVS system (Ratt has made a few of use Dev status now). So currently it's being hosted elsewhere with full source. Lately only a few of us has made changes and we have done very well not stepping on each other (not the best way but it worked for the time being).

As for the binaries I don't care if they are in them or not, I personally don't care for the MA2Auth method even tho it was a good idea but it's flawed in concept. It was created to stop mass production of the programs being sold. But in reality they made it very nice for those selling it to have license control in it. For example, you want to buy it from me then I tell you to run this file then send me the files and I compile it for that machine only then you can only run it on that machine, but wait you have 2 computers and for another fee I'll compile the source with both Auth's in there so now you can run them on either system.

I will stop putting in binaries in the future releases but others will come up with ways to circumvent are efforts. I do development on this project because I'm bored with EQ the game and find it fun to do.

BTW your post want start anything because most folks here respect others, that why I develop here as well. The only think that will get raised is where's the binaries in the new releases.

I guess I will stop on 1.15.x series and put forth all the efforts on the 2.0 version and starting with those not distribute the binaries. This will also force folks to upgrade to the 2.0 versions if they want support (not what I care to see happen). This will be done to ensure the project lives and folks can still use it withour worrying if Sony gonna catch them. Once I do this please don't PM me asking for the binaries.

SEQ don't supply binaries becuase the Compilers come with the OS and was easy to find a step by step walk thru on how to do it.

[Stogar]

Good point about the MQ2Auth program. I think the intent was to slow the rampant use by those who would abuse it.

The issue with SEQ always was that the general population wouldn't be able to do everything nessesary to get it running. A Windows version compiled or not is much easier to get going. Also the SEQ community was a lot less helpful to those that would abuse it.

That's great it's moving to it's own section. It's great that it'll be source only from now on. It's great to get everyone up to the newest rev.

I think if the more resposible people in the community step back up we can keep the abuse to a bare minimum.

[z26o]

I for one appreciate the binaries and would ask that you continue to provide them. I like seeing the souce as well because I am teaching myself C# and this helps me understand the concepts.

If we force the user base to complie the source then that will just open up a ton of "how do I" or "I get this error" from the folks that don't use compilers normally. It's still open source, what's the big deal?

If you ask me, leave in the binaries.

Thanks for all your efforts.

z

[Stogar]

The problem with binaries is that anyone can get, use and distribute them. If you have people compile it you take it one step back to where people who would abuse it may not have the fortitude to go through the trouble.

Sure it may spawn alot of "How do I...." messages. A simple HOWTO, FAQ or readme can be created and point them to.

If you learning c# then you've most likely got access to a compiler, in which case it's a grand total of like 10 clicks before you have a running copy of MySEQ.

Bottom line is just to make it harder to mainstream, not a question of opensource.

[MQSEQ2]

The binaries and learning C# isn't what reduces the user population it's the lack of some folks not having compilers. SEQ was very easy to get up and running (I built from ground up Mandrake 8.x and latest SEQ in under 1 hr, very easy and din't really need to know alot of Linux).

By not supplying the binaries don't garuntee that we weed out the bad apples since most of those folks will get a copy of the compilers and build it themselves. All this really does is show Sony hey we respect the game and don't wan't them to modify there code that casues us to be broken for awhile. I have folks all the time asking me to compile things for them because they can't afford VS .Net 2003 (thanks Microsoft).

I'm not concerned about the "How ..." wuestions because I've been a professional instructor and been in tech support many years so I can explain it so anyone can understand it. Then once I explain it a couple of times people learn to try the stuff before they post. The problem with the SEQ community is they like to trash folks instead of helping anybody which causes more worthless and waste of time reading then good because the folks finally will get the answers sooner or later. I watched SEQ grow stale because of that.

As for the binaries I won't supply them but that doesn't mean someone else won't.

[Stogar]

Come now, we both know that you are a little more advanced in computer knowledge than the average EQ user. I know technical people who it would take a day or two to get SEQ installed.

Personally I couldn't care less what Sony thinks, respects or whatever.

All you need is one user to make the project worth while, yourself. More users doesn't mean a better program, it means more trouble.

Anyone can get Visual Studio if they take 5 minutes to search, and an hour or so to download. If the program is that important I'm sure they could take that small amount of time to get it built.

As far as others go with releasing binaries....that problem solves itself. Someone will soon enough build a keylogger into it and steal their accounts, very easy to do and very hard for someone to detect that only is interested in a binary.

Source code only keeps things working without as much trouble and it weeds out the deadwood, IMO.

Thanks for the great job at taking up the lead on the project MQSEQ2.

[MQSEQ2]

I found the walk thrus for SEQ in matter of 10 mins of searching then once I burned the cd's it was easy and at the time I hadn't used Linux for 9 years (when it first came out and didn't do alot with it then), so my knowledge was very limited.

More people don't make a better project because if it was true this would be a PoS program but it's how they use the program. MySEQ is like SEQ in the sense it's a tool to see the world not truely exploit it. MQ on the other hand is what causes the greedy folks come out of the wood works. I think Sony should have a macro engine built in to do basic stuff make it a skill or something. A large majority of the MQ folks use it to svae the hands from all the clicks with a few trying to expolit the game.

I ran SEQ and MQ and I can tell you I never looked at the source code (like most others), so just having the source code doesn't always mean it's not doing anything it shouldn't, what it does mean is if you don't trust it you can check it yourself and post your findings. If there was bad code folks would point it out very quickly.

Now for keyboard logging, yes it can be done but MQ and MySEQ dont kick in until the eggame gets loaded so if they don't trust the binaries they can launch them after you have your character totally in game, which is way after the login process.

I can prove and disprove anything giving it's worthwhile doing. I did this post to just clarify for the others because bottom line I don't really care if I get banned or not. If I did I would unleash every effort to make a better product readilly available to the masses by using the store bought cards. As it is now I'm just wasting time till I find something else in life to do. Dang I hate being bored hehe.

I do understand your concern for all the projects and that's why I decided to stop publishing the binaries. I want people to use the products and have fun in the game without worrying about being banned.

[Blind Aviator]

I think releasing source only and no binaries is basically a flawed idea...
SEQ tried the same thing and for about 2 years it worked (that was the whole reason for having a LibEQ file) until the devs got "behind" after a patch broke the code for ~3 months... Why it took them ~3 months to "fix" SEQ is still a mystery to many of us but it did have one positive impact, MySEQ was created...

Once MySEQ (and several other like programs) were in the open and working Ratt admitted the LibEQ file was now obsolete as it was *ONLY* there to "prevent" someone from creating a Windoze version... Soon after he removed the need for the LibEQ file and wrote the code directly into SEQ to decode the data stream....

I think releasing source only will have very little impact on the "abuse" of the program as a whole.... The people that will abuse it either already have compilers or can get them very quickly (there are MANY free compilers on the web)....

More than likely what I see happening is someone that doesn't like the source only will begin to compile the source and host it somewhere for people without the knowledge or the ability to compile it themselves...

Unfortunately what else I see happening is some people taking the source and adding in trojans or other viruses to steal users login info and then compiling it for those without the knowledge or ability to do it themselves.... Since there will no longer be a binary available from the real devs these people will have little choice but to download these trojan laiden binaries.....

What I see happening once that starts to occur is either this project dwindling away slowly or someone else taking the source and starting their own project and releasing binaries....

IMHO source only is a very bad idea.... I personally will have little problems compiling it but others that depend upon the binaries will have to run the possible trojan binaries guantlet....

BA

[high_jeeves]

ShowEQ was broken for 3 months (more than one time, actually) because of MAJOR and NON TRIVIAL changes to the encryption scheme. Thanks to some very bright people who were working on the project then (and may still be, I dont really know), the encryption was eventually cracked, and a new version of libEQ.a (which contained the decryption methods) was released immediately. If you are unclear as to why showEQ took 3 months to fix, i recommend you try to write a program to crack a 64 bit public/private key encryption system in realtime.

At one point during the downtime for showEQ, it was modified to take a key from a memory sniffer, transmitted over UDP. This memory sniffer was then modified (by the owner of this project, and others) to leach all of the data (spawns, zone, etc) out of memory, and bypass encryption all together. Hence, the birth of MySEQ.

At some point (in the not so distant past), sony changed their packet structure and encryption (i beleive it is much much weaker now, but i havent looked, so i dont really know). At this point, the leaders of the project (Ratt) decided that there was no point in keeping the encryption closed source, since there was already a windows version (Based on the mem sniffer technology), and because the decryption had become so trivial. So, libEQ.a was no longer needed as part of the project, and hence it was removed.

[cavemanbob]

MyShowEQ is open source and always will be, the CVS is really, really out of date, but this will changeshortly as well. As for not including binaries, don't bother, if someone else won't precompile them I will. Once the server is converted to C# anyone who can run the software has the .NET framework runtime which includes the compiler anyway, and it's hardly complicated to compile, so why even bother not including a binary? Signed binaries are probably a better idea.

Moving to a new site is under consideration, it's probably a good idea, but we'll see.

[MQSEQ2]

After reading the posts here and seeing the poll I created it looks like everyone still wants the binaries, which tells me the mjority of the folks use this program to benefit there pla time and since it really can't be use to alter EQ (passively reads memory) I will continue to supply the binaries.

I come to this conclusion becuase of one post only and that was Cavemanbob's. This project was started by CMB so I respect his views on how the project should progress. I created a project space for the project if CMB wants to move to it. I'm not here to force folks to move or to use the projects.

If folks want to see this project survive then they will use the programs in a fashion that won't bring undo focus to the project (meaning don't run ye mouth and get caught with it). It's a whole new game once you open your eyes with these programs.

[Stogar]

I see the points, and well made ones at that.

Obviously though if you put up a poll the community is going to vote for binaries. I posted this in dev forum for devs really.


Maybe it's just a better idea to work this problem from the front end instead of the back. Like I posted on some other boards, if we can start watchdogging ourselves again then maybe we can stop the abuse that way.

I'm sure if the abusers know that people like us are watching for them, instead of just SOE, they may stop doing what they are doing.

What better additional use of the program then to use it to catch people abusing it.

[Gnutter]

Originally posted by Stogar
Anyone can get Visual Studio if they take 5 minutes to search, and an hour or so to download. If the program is that important I'm sure they could take that small amount of time to get it built.

Stogar,

I'm sure a lot of people have done this but beware what you advocate. It's very different running a piece of software that violates a EULA to downloading pirated copies of Visual Studio.

As i understand it's really not necessary anyway. You should be able to compile with the compiler that comes with the framework. Its a bit trickier but completely legal.

[MQSEQ2]

I haven't tried it but you could try to use the DOS command nmake to compile the code. I know nmake will work but can't remember if it comes in the .Net Framework 1.1 (but I think it does).

If someone wants to try this, here's the instructions on how to do it:

1) Open a DOS prompt
2) Change into the source directory
3) nmake /all

If it's gonna work, you should see it doing alot of work and should take a few secs.

If you get an error about nmake is not a valid command you can try a search on you hard drive to see if it's there, if so add that path to your path statement then reboot and try agian.

If it's not on your system go to Microsoft and search for nmake.

I know nmake comes with WinXP by default.