[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

Thx for the translation, I'll add it to the first post, later.

About the issues:
Open the vc71 project file - V$ 2008 should convert it.
Now add the files in /AntiLeech to your project and compile. There are NO changes necessary. Be sure not to change the code... in my project the lines under A and B do not exist in the way you posted them (unicode/codepage issue with your development environment?)

The codes in C are basically equal... no need to change that, either.

[dylandog84]

Hi guys, excuse me for my insistence and my questions, but i like to know everything about the mod's world...

Wiz, could you report the emf's link or could you better explain me what does this "feature" do?

Quote

Added bad ul/dl session handling as discussed on eMF:
* 3 CONSECUTIVE failed ul sessions will result in us allowing uploads ONLY if we are already connected
* 3..5 CONSECUTIVE failed dl sessions will result in a score reduce of 1 chunk per dl session
* 6 CONSECUTIVE failed dl sessions will result in a (2-way!) BAN

I'm writing a simple italian guide about your mod...

Thanks.

This post has been edited by dylandog84: 07 April 2010 - 09:17 PM

[taz-me]

dylandog84, on 07 April 2010 - 01:35 PM, said:

I'm writing a simple italian guide about your mod...

I wonder whether your work will be available (as far as copyright and alike stuff) for integration withing others work (or you could do some merging, if desired), since there's an already existing SharkX Italian & English wiki (founded by Raid / cellax). SharkX is now derived from AcKroNiC. AcKroNiC future versions (as well as eMuleFuture - I closing gaps right now ) are going to be based on Tombstone. Further more as a matter of fact all Client Analyzer related guides are (and obviously will) relevant even to non Tombstone based mods, as long as same CA code is in use (for example AnalyZZUL, MagicAngel and more).

[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

dylandog84, on 07 April 2010 - 01:35 PM, said:

Wiz, could you report the emf's link or could you better explain me how does this "feature" do?

Quote

Added bad ul/dl session handling as discussed on eMF:
* 3 CONSECUTIVE failed ul sessions will result in us allowing uploads ONLY if we are already connected
* 3..5 CONSECUTIVE failed dl sessions will result in a score reduce of 1 chunk per dl session
* 6 CONSECUTIVE failed dl sessions will result in a (2-way!) BAN

First of all, I think it's great that you show so much enthusiasm
I think the points are self-explaining...

1) if a client has 3 failed ul sessions in a row, we will not add him to upload if we do not already have a connection to that client... that's basically the same as with lowID users. This way, I want to avoid that an upload session fails just because we obviously cannot create a connection to that client on demand.

2) If we have 3..5 failed dl sessions in a row from a client, we will punish him a bit... that's because it's a common (very bad coded) leecher mod behaviour: you pass their queue, they add you to their upload and cancel it ASAP (or just remove you from upload and your connection times out) and you have to start over in their queue.

3) With the sixth faild DL session in a row, we will ban the client for the reasons mentioned above. It's extremely unlikely that this client would upload to us in the future anyways.

[once375ml]

tHeWiZaRdOfDoS, on 07 April 2010 - 06:44 PM, said:

Thx for the translation, I'll add it to the first post, later.

About the issues:
Open the vc71 project file - V$ 2008 should convert it.
Now add the files in /AntiLeech to your project and compile. There are NO changes necessary. Be sure not to change the code... in my project the lines under A and B do not exist in the way you posted them (unicode/codepage issue with your development environment?)

The codes in C are basically equal... no need to change that, either.

I will convert codepage of AntiLeech files before using it and have a try later!

Thanks for your guide !

And a doubt: how big could the antileech records be ?

[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

That depends on how many clients you "know"... on my system eMule runs 24/7 but I rarely download... the .met file is ~1MB in size.

[once375ml]

tHeWiZaRdOfDoS, on 08 April 2010 - 12:26 AM, said:

That depends on how many clients you "know"... on my system eMule runs 24/7 but I rarely download... the .met file is ~1MB in size.

So what to share ? OR you are a ReleaseMan ！






Tried , failed !

Could you post these lines of A and B in your codepage ?

I wonder the differences.

I still get the same errors of A and B.

about C, if donn't change, vs 2008 shows error

This post has been edited by once375ml: 07 April 2010 - 05:07 PM

[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

Here you go:

A:

Quote

const int tag1 = strNick.Find(L'«' + testModString[i].strMod);

B:

Quote

const int tag2 = strNick.Find(L'»', tag1+1);

EDiT: about my ul/dl behaviour: yes, I help some rls groups and download rare/old stuff.

This post has been edited by tHeWiZaRdOfDoS: 07 April 2010 - 05:08 PM

[once375ml]

tHeWiZaRdOfDoS, on 08 April 2010 - 01:08 AM, said:

Here you go:

A:

Quote

const int tag1 = strNick.Find(L'«' + testModString[i].strMod);

B:

Quote

const int tag2 = strNick.Find(L'»', tag1+1);

EDiT: about my ul/dl behaviour: yes, I help some rls groups and download rare/old stuff.

Now i am sure it's codepage's problem, VS 2008 shows it's not a unicode character.

I am not sure it's correct to save them as unicode

Is "«" equal to double "< " ?

This post has been edited by once375ml: 08 April 2010 - 12:45 AM

[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

No it isn't... it's a special char that's used by some mods (Xtreme based) for their nick addon. "<<" would be 2 chars while "«" is just one.
I am sorry that I can't help you with that... the only advice I can give you is to either remove that codepart (TS will still work fine) or to check all V$ settings for the codepage setting.

[once375ml]

tHeWiZaRdOfDoS, on 08 April 2010 - 01:47 PM, said:

No it isn't... it's a special char that's used by some mods (Xtreme based) for their nick addon. "<<" would be 2 chars while "«" is just one.
I am sorry that I can't help you with that... the only advice I can give you is to either remove that codepart (TS will still work fine) or to check all V$ settings for the codepage setting.

Get it


Copy it from xtreme source


edited:

I think it works, this modfaker is caught !

This post has been edited by once375ml: 08 April 2010 - 07:05 AM

[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

Great... though the question is: why doesn't it accept MY source code?!

[once375ml]

tHeWiZaRdOfDoS, on 08 April 2010 - 04:50 PM, said:

Great... though the question is: why doesn't it accept MY source code?!

one suggestion:

if one is a bad or a tombstone , why not just show the icon of bad or tombstone, rather than keep both the standard and the specified icon ?

and if one is a both bad and a tombstone(can be so ? ). which icon to show ?



I think bad should be more evil:


Tombstone_BAD.ico (3 KB)

This post has been edited by once375ml: 09 April 2010 - 09:49 AM

[dylandog84]

Many thanks Wizard for your perfect explanation.

@Taz, my work will be available for who will be interested.

This post has been edited by dylandog84: 09 April 2010 - 11:23 AM

[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

@dylandog84: no problem

once375ml, on 09 April 2010 - 11:22 AM, said:

one suggestion:

if one is a bad or a tombstone , why not just show the icon of bad or tombstone, rather than keep both the standard and the specified icon ?

and if one is a both bad and a tombstone(can be so ? ). which icon to show ?

The TS icon is intended to show the same mod version(s) while the skull shall indicate "bad" clients. A TS client CAN be bad (e.g. by terms of ratio) but the icon is not shown if the remote client is a modthief.

[once375ml]

hi, tHeWiZaRdOfDoS


I do some modification to your mod for batter capability of localization

basicly, your CA readable output: clientdetails window and log window

I donn't think it is necessary to show modver in clientdetails windows, no place to show it, so just softver is enough.








here is it, you decide if take or not

if(i & AT_NICKTHIEF)
  AppendWithBlank(reason, GetResString(IDS_NICKTHIEF));
if(i & AT_MODTHIEF)
  AppendWithBlank(reason, GetResString(IDS_MODTHIEF));
if(i & AT_FILEFAKER)
  AppendWithBlank(reason, GetResString(IDS_FILEFAKER));
if(i & AT_UDPFNFFAKER)
  AppendWithBlank(reason, GetResString(IDS_UDPFNFFAKER));
if(i & AT_MODFAKER)
  AppendWithBlank(reason, GetResString(IDS_MODFAKER));

if(m_pParent && (!m_pParent->GetRequestFile() || m_pParent->GetDownloadState() > DS_ONQUEUE)); //idle :P
  else if(chunksDL < chunksUL)
			reason.AppendFormat(GetResString(IDS_BAD_UD_RATIO)+ L" ", chunksUL, chunksDL);
	//reason.AppendFormat(L"\nBad UL/DL ratio (%I64u/%I64u)\n", chunksUL, chunksDL);
// }

if(/*!bBasics ||*/ IsFastAskClient())
      	reason.AppendFormat(GetResString(IDS_REASK)+ L" ", GetReaskCount());
/*
   	After testing, no more space for time, if we get three or more strings to show.
	CA do the judgement (how mang times allowed in a certain time); so just show the result!
	*/
  //reason.AppendFormat(L"Reask: %u @ %s avg\n", GetReaskCount(), CastSecondsToHM(GetAvgReaskTime()/1000));
if(/*!bBasics ||*/ GetSpams() > 0)
  reason.AppendFormat(GetResString(IDS_SPAMS)+ L" ", GetSpams());
   //reason.AppendFormat(L"Spams: %i\n", GetSpams());
if(/*!bBasics ||*/ IsXSExploiter())
  reason.AppendFormat(GetResString(IDS_XS)+ L" " , m_pData->uXSAsks, m_pData->uXSAnsw);
  //reason.AppendFormat(L"XS: %u | %u\n", m_pData->uXSAsks, m_pData->uXSAnsw);
if(/*!bBasics ||*/ IsXSSpammer())
  reason.AppendFormat(GetResString(IDS_FAST_XS)+ L" ", m_pData->iFastXSAsks);
  //reason.AppendFormat(L"FastXS: %i", m_pData->iFastXSAsks);
if(/*!bBasics ||*/ m_pData->uBadULSessions || m_pData->uBadDLSessions)
  reason.AppendFormat(GetResString(IDS_FAILED_UD), m_pData->uBadULSessions, m_pData->uBadDLSessions);
  //reason.AppendFormat(L"Failed UL/DL: %u/%u", m_pData->uBadULSessions, m_pData->uBadDLSessions); 

and ...



ClientAnalyzer.cpp (66 KB)

Resource.h (105 KB)

emule.rc (206 KB)




Of course, simplified chinese first:

zh_CN.rc (89 KB)

zh_CN.dll (42 KB)

This post has been edited by once375ml: 10 April 2010 - 06:46 AM

[dylandog84]

Another question (again)...

Is modstring support related to Easy modversion?

Thanks

This post has been edited by dylandog84: 10 April 2010 - 05:38 PM

[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

"Easy modversion" is the way I tagged the modstring support in my mod... so "yes"

[bscabral]

Wiz, where is a 0.50a tombstone 2.1 floating around, is it legit ?

[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

No, not yet. I am working on the merge but that is a Beta that has been leaked, somehow... we are currently investigating how that could happen with a closed Beta area.