Unpacked Clients for pRO with ways of finding hex codes

[Raider]

Here. http://www.mediafire.com/?8ib64n85fgr6tvw

Thank you very much.

I would like to request a link of this file in the first post, very useful for other users!

[kings091]

is there any stripper application that works on Win8?

[bodaday21]

There's a new RAGEXE in valk. And I can't seem to find the CODES. Does anyone knows the NEW HEX CODES? THANK IN ADVANCE.

[noobotter]

There's a new RAGEXE in valk. And I can't seem to find the CODES. Does anyone knows the NEW HEX CODES? THANK IN ADVANCE.

Kindly check this page http://forums.openkore.com/viewtopic.ph ... &start=160 to see if the method is working for you.

[heero]

I have updated the first post. Thanks for keeping the topic running noobotter, been busy with work so hardly have time to check on updates to pRO server.

[vhonn]

Here. http://www.mediafire.com/?8ib64n85fgr6tvw

Thank you very much.

I would like to request a link of this file in the first post, very useful for other users!

Norton detects the file as suspicious.cloud.2.. Any idea why? or just false positive

[rpacx]

There's a new RAGEXE in valk. And I can't seem to find the CODES. Does anyone knows the NEW HEX CODES? THANK IN ADVANCE.

Kindly check this page http://forums.openkore.com/viewtopic.ph ... &start=160 to see if the method is working for you.

that isn't working and you can't find that codes on the new exe. I have also saw that the codes in kernel and gdi are varying. Because i was performing hexing procedures last night and today with a new exe, and i was surprise when the code are not the same. I dont know if this normal. I had disassemble the new exe last night and today, and the codes are not the same. What would be the solution for this?

[noobotter]

Norton detects the file as suspicious.cloud.2.. Any idea why? or just false positive

Just false detection.

that isn't working and you can't find that codes on the new exe. I have also saw that the codes in kernel and gdi are varying. Because i was performing hexing procedures last night and today with a new exe, and i was surprise when the code are not the same. I dont know if this normal. I had disassemble the new exe last night and today, and the codes are not the same. What would be the solution for this?

The codes are different because the client used as an example on that procedure is old.
You should follow the same method used on that and apply on the exe that you have right now.

[rpacx]

that isn't working and you can't find that codes on the new exe. I have also saw that the codes in kernel and gdi are varying. Because i was performing hexing procedures last night and today with a new exe, and i was surprise when the code are not the same. I dont know if this normal. I had disassemble the new exe last night and today, and the codes are not the same. What would be the solution for this?

The codes are different because the client used as an example on that procedure is old.
You should follow the same method used on that and apply on the exe that you have right now.

forgot to mention that i have used the same method, and unfortunately it was not working. i saw this on your post:

Search:
85 C0 74 07 C6 05 EF 6B 96 00 01 33 DB
Replace:
85 C0 EB 07 C6 05 5E F6 B9 00 01 33 DB

i thought that only the "74" will change with "EB" . What is the meaning of that code highlighted and why is that change?

[noobotter]

forgot to mention that i have used the same method, and unfortunately it was not working. i saw this on your post:

Search:
85 C0 74 07 C6 05 EF 6B 96 00 01 33 DB
Replace:
85 C0 EB 07 C6 05 5E F6 B9 00 01 33 DB

i thought that only the "74" will change with "EB" . What is the meaning of that code highlighted and why is that change?

That's not my original post. I just quoted heero's previous method about that.
The change from 74 to EB is a change to JMP in assembly language.
I don't know why there's a change on that bold letters though.

The codes I've posted are these:

search:
85 c0 74 07 c6 05 e7 a2 98 00 01 33 db
replace:
85 c0 eb 07 c6 05 e7 a2 98 00 01 33 db

search:
85 c0 0f 85 d1 00 00 00 0f be 05 19 fe 89 00
replace:
85 c0 90 90 90 90 90 90 0f be 05 19 fe 89 00

search:
e8 42 27 dd ff 3b c6 74 75
replace:
90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

Kindly try these codes first and see if it's still working.