Is this the future?

[GratefulUser]

Now that this memory reader is working, is anyone working on a way to go back to the old passive method? Or is the memory reader the only way due to some change by Verant?

[Dedpoet]

Yes.

Please read any of the insane number of active topics here. Encyption has been changed to the point where it can't be passively broken and must be read from memory. There are many different solutions from many different people in the Development forum. Personally, I'm just waiting a bit to see how it all goes down before I decide what I will be doing. GPS mode is 90% of why I use Seq anyway, so I am still pretty content with the current passive solution.

[MisterSpock]

Well, I don't want to lead people astray from the direction things are going. In all likelihood, we are probably going to be stuck with the choice of passive GPS or Decode + Keysniffer.

However, that said, I'm taking a look at the keys the sniffer is dumping out. Specifically, I'm looking for any mathematical anomalies that might be present. I don't have enough keys yet to be able to draw any conclusions. The sheer length of the key alone, however, leads me to believe that the chances of this coming to fruition are very slim.

[devnul]

in this regard would it be helpful to log keys?

or would we be tracked by keys?

dn

[MisterSpock]

For now, if you have saved some keys you have received, just hold on to them. I don't think we should post them here.

[darkangelx]

One simple fact nothing can be completely random. There has to be some normalcy in reguards to the keys. Even if they do seem random there is a logical way they are being used based on the fact that we are talking about mathmatics, however complex that it is.

It could be the name of the player in hex format multiplied by offset X + the hex of the first 4 letters of the current zone. Which would make the key seem random from user to user. Assuming something like this is true, there is a rhyme and reason to the "randomness" of the key, we just are not looking at it the right way. (something from the movie contact made me think of this)

Am I completely off base? I mean I know I am not a coder or even someone who has monitored and can read tcpdump etc. However, I am trying to think logically.

[Jojo]

Most of the time when randomness is needed the current time of the system running is used. This coupled with the randomness (unpredictability if you prefer) provided by network latency would make it impossible to break.

[darkangelx]

I do not believe anything is impossible just very difficult or not likely.

[speedphreak]

try to ignite a match on a bar of soap.....


Seriously, there is such a thing as computationally infeasible. Yes, we can brute the 64-bit key given time and hardware, but it's computationally large enough that it's not feasible for us to do so.

And as radioactive half-lives are not being used to generate the random numbers they're not truly random, but they may as well be for our purposes.

I don't think theoretical discussions will serve us much here, better to stick to practicalities

[baelang]

i don't know. i have seen an unproportional number of keys that start with ffffffff. i would bet that if we logged keys and did a histogram of the data over a large enough sample, we would be able to reduce the keyspace quite a bit.

i don't know if it would reduce the number of keys enough to be useful, but we won't know until we try.