Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Nightcrawler

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 72
Site Talk / Re: Old hacks/translations deleted?
« on: February 05, 2016, 05:52:43 pm »
At one time, I thought the goal was for this site to be an archive, one-stop collection for everything.  Apparently that's not the case anymore, so just erase whatever you want.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. The site has never carried multiple versions of the same hack, which was the only reason it was flagged. Since you clarified it's in fact not the same hack, please add it back. I support you in doing so! :thumbsup:

Site Talk / Re: Old hacks/translations deleted?
« on: February 04, 2016, 08:07:25 pm »
Different text routine, compression routines, etc.  I'd be willing to bet the translation isn't the same, either.  In fact, I'm completely certain the intros at least are different.

The value to me is quite a bit diminished when all of those things are incomplete. If it were me, I'd get back to work and finish that project so all that hard work of all those aforementioned people on your patch doesn't go to waste! :P

Anyway, it doesn't matter what I think. Add it back if you think that it has value. It wasn't flagged because of value. It was flagged for being a previous unfinished version of another finished version. Two versions of the same thing was non-compliant.

I'm sorry that turned out to be in error. All I knew was what was written in that description! So please, you or Gideon, fix that description to be accurate so this interpretation is never made by anyone again! :)

Site Talk / Re: Old hacks/translations deleted?
« on: February 04, 2016, 05:47:44 pm »
Gideon wrote:

This project is actually a continuation/reboot of the work done by SirYoink on the game over the last fifteen years or so. While the hacking is all new and done by Gideon Zhi, the script translation was done by Eien ni Hen (Ancient Magic, Romancing SaGa 2) who worked with SirYoink on this. After SirYoink gave his blessing the project moved forward into full gear and the new script dump was passed over to Eien ni Hen, who dropped her earlier translation into it. The rest, as they say, is history. While not without its challenges (this was not a simple hack!) the project was still one of the smoothest AGTP has been involved in. 

As it reads, we see it's a continuation of SirYoink's work, it uses the same script from Eien ni Hen, and it had SirYoink's blessings... So, my logic concluded that:

This project and it's work was directly continued in the Aeon Genesis/Eien Ni Hen project and completed. This entry is thus a previous unfinished version of that and can be removed.

First, I'd suggest Gideon or yourself amend the description of the completed translation to be accurate. That was the root cause of this. Second, there is no way to undelete an entry, so if you really need the unfinished version, you'll have to add it new. I'm not sure what value there is to having it though. It uses the exact same translation as the completed version.

Site Talk / Re: Releasing a hacked version of an abandoned hacking program
« on: February 04, 2016, 05:35:15 pm »
Isn't it there an "unofficial version" term?
search > Utilities > unofficial  :-X

Yes. These are just like this case. I don't think the logistics of it being a patch, config file, or executable really makes any difference as far as it's handling on RHDN. It looks to be the established means for doing this type of thing. We could always add another 'Addendum' type category to the Utilities section as well, but it's probably better if they come up together in most searches so people see there is an alternative version.

Site Talk / Re: Long delay in loading certain pages.
« on: February 03, 2016, 09:19:19 pm »
Ah... I have some recollection of that now that you mentioned the Jazzy theme. No problem with your computer afterall! :)

Yes, the Jazzy theme utilized the TopUp javascript library. I think it used it for popup help on the forms or something like that (I didn't design it). It was pulling the latest version from the TopUp website (http://www.gettopup.com), which looks to now be reset or taken over by domain squatter. The update link used is a 404 now. Here is a copy of the original library page.

It seems like the library may be dead now. Google doesn't seem to turn up any new places for it. I guess we'll have to remove that line or something and let it be a bit broken.


Site Talk / Re: Releasing a hacked version of an abandoned hacking program
« on: February 02, 2016, 07:51:37 pm »
We also have some precedence of a second entry for a fixed/patched utility such as this one:

Original Tile Layer Pro
Bug Fix patch version

I know there is probably another one where there is an entry for a second version of the utility leaving the original in tact in its original entry, although I can't remember any other specific examples now.

I think it would be poor ethics to edit the original archive, or replace the original utility entry. However, I don't think it's very objectionable to make a patch for it, or a second entry with an updated/fixed version.

Site Talk / Re: Long delay in loading certain pages.
« on: February 02, 2016, 07:50:44 pm »
Yes, it sounds like malware on your computer. I don't see anything suspicious on any pages here.

Site Talk / Re: FAQ entry for comctl32.ocx?
« on: January 09, 2016, 01:56:06 pm »
We could add it to the FAQ, but this is something that applies only to programs developed on VB6. VB6 is now about 18 years old I think! I wouldn't even bother using any utilities that old myself. Microsoft ended extended support for that IDE 8 years ago already as well. It doesn't seem like a relative issue for RHDN to care about as a top level site issue at this point.

This is something that is best put into the individual description pages of applicable utilities. If you know of utilities requiring comctl32.ocx, feel free to update their descriptions accordingly.

Site Talk / Re: DataCrystal bad-language policy ?
« on: January 06, 2016, 07:09:23 pm »
I thought this was a topic about datacrystal...

Isn't it pretty obvious that the information on datacrystal should be just that... informational only? There's really no suitable place there for narration, opinion, etc (nor should there be one). Whole documents don't belong there either. There is a whole document section here for that. Certainly relevant information can be extracted from that document and added to Datacrystal where appropriate, but it makes no sense to me to upload that document there.

The issue of vulgarity really should be a moot point. There is no usable ROM hacking information contained in vulgarity, therefore why would you add it to an informational wiki? :P

Site Talk / Re: Downloads problem?
« on: January 05, 2016, 06:35:09 pm »
So here's another couple of ideas. RHDN can use one of those bot screener authentication systems. You know the ones that show you a picture and you have to input the proper info about the picture to access the download?
Something along those lines is a potential for the long term. They were not an option for the short term though. A good deal of infrastructure change is necessary to accommodate, as well as comparison/study of resource usage. There are a number of issues to consider for each individual option too. reCAPTCHA requires javascript to function with no fallback functionality, and would have third party requests going out for every download (has a significant negative impact on resources here). There are local libraries like Securimage, which also have their own issues etc.

I have been thinking about a better long term solution of our own. We don't really need to block all bots. It's far easier to prevent these malware scanning bots than it is to say block spambots (or even worse paid spam workers). Since Google nor several of these others scanning services would ever be bothered to actually implement custom code for our site, they would potentially be defeatable with a page where you just copy and paste a given generated password right next to it. I doubt Google would ever add several lines of code specifically to automate this on RHDN, just to scan our files...

So, I think we can roll our own simple solution with minimal resource usage, and minimal inconvenience. This would need to be done in conjunction with accounts and sessions. So, logged in people would be exempt from the test, and non-logged people would require the test only once per browser session.

Anyway, I will continue to explore this avenue when time allows. :)

There is nothing we can do about Google. Here at RHDN however, there is an equally effective and simpler solution than the one currently in place: http://www.captcha.net/  :thumbsup:
Oh, the irony! The reCAPTCHA project is a Google project, you know. Although they currently claim to respect whether or not you choose to allow googlebots past it, I'm not sure that applies to their safe browsing bots. Regardless, they certainly have the abilities to bypass it when/if they want.

Site Talk / Re: Why?
« on: January 05, 2016, 06:06:03 pm »
This is explained on the login page of any download... We don't need continued duplicate topics.

All downloads currently require being logged in to download. This is not RHDN's desire. We are forced to do this thanks to Google's Safe Browsing Service. Google falsely labeled our site as a malware site, and started blocking many areas of the site in Chrome, Firefox, and Safari browsers. This is entirely due to overly aggressive false positives on our downloads (they even scan inside compressed archive files such as zip). They do not allow any course of action against false positives. The only way to clear the site was making the downloads inaccessible, and requesting a rescan from Google.

Further information can be found in the following forum topics:

Site: Recent Malware Warnings

My browser detects malware in one of the hack's page.

P.S. Nothing can be done about the login redirect to the forum. The forum handles the login. It's supposed to be able to redirect, but it never worked right after getting rid of their ridiculous SSI include, which made the site 40% slower. SMF 2.1 is supposed to come out this decade. Perhaps it can be looked at again then after new templates since they canned support for the new template formats they just made for 2.0... I hate the SMF backend. It's unfortunately a ridiculous amount of work to switch the site to something else.

Site Talk / Re: Downloads problem?
« on: December 30, 2015, 09:49:03 am »
I don't mean to sound rude or anything, but this seems like a rather foolish idea in my honest opinion. I'm just offering my opinion on this matter. Wouldn't it be better to contact the staff at Google and explain that this site is in fact safe, rather than resorting to requiring members to login so that they may download files here? I'm just saying...

You do sound rude, and you apparently have not read any of the topics on the forum about this. What you're suggesting cannot be done. Please go find the appropriate contact for this at Google. You won't find it. Google specifically only allows a request for re-scan, and appealing through http://www.StopBadware.org, which we have done and they declined to help us.

We don't appreciate misinformed accusations of foolishness with no substance. It's not friendly, and it's not respectful. Staff here does not deserve this treatment. Nobody on staff wants this to happen. If you want to discuss informed alternative possibilities to solve the issue, we'd love to do so. Please do not do so in the manner and tone you've presented above. Play on the same team, we have the same goals. :)

Site Talk / Re: Downloads problem?
« on: December 29, 2015, 01:19:06 pm »
Login authentication is not going to stop those warnings. Antivirus/Anti-malware suites are still going to report files scanned and where they came from. All you're doing is annoying your fanbase, especially without any warning. Posting it in big bold letters on the front page "WARNING: LOGIN NOW REQUIRED FOR ALL DOWNLOADS!" is likely a good idea.
Yes it would, and it did stop the warnings. The problem comes from Google's Safe Browsing Service which is the cause of the blocking in Chrome, Firefox, and Safari. This is not a local antivirus software issue. This is a global Google issue. Since there is no recourse for false positives with Google, requiring authentication for the downloads allowed us to request a re-scan from Google, pass their scan, and they are removing the warnings.

Suitable information\warning has since been added to the download login page informing all affected users of the situation.

There's also privacy and legal issues to consider. Logins require logging! Logs can be used in a court...
Not really. There is no logging whatsoever associated with downloads. There's not even any logging associated logins in general beyond a temporary web server session so you can be logged into the site. The forum also stores a session id and the last time you logged in for the forum, but that's about it. SMF is used, and open source, so you can check the extent of sessions there yourself.

It's really quite harmless. There's no information available aside from when you last logged in. Even the general web server IP access logs are tallied for statistics each day, and reset. Relax. :)

Wouldn't it be easier and more effective to simply require authors to enclose their projects in password protected container files such as zip, rar or 7z on the project page?
I don't see how it would be easy to address the existing near 10,000 downloads available on the site.

Site Talk / Re: Scratchpad Problem?
« on: December 28, 2015, 07:02:25 pm »
No... You'd leave yourself open to security holes... From the Apache manual for example:

Files can have more than one extension, and the order of the extensions is normally irrelevant. For example, if the file welcome.html.fr maps onto content type text/html and language French then the file welcome.fr.html will map onto exactly the same information. If more than one extension is given which maps onto the same type of meta-information, then the one to the right will be used, except for languages and content encodings. For example, if .gif maps to the MIME-type image/gif and .html maps to the MIME-type text/html, then the file welcome.gif.html will be associated with the MIME-type text/html.”

So, a file named 'filename.php.abc', will be interpreted as a PHP file and will be executed if the last extension is not specified in the list of mime-types known to the web server.

There are of course other ways to avoid this being a possibility. Nonetheless, I choose to do this because I think non-extension related periods are bad filename form (a number of other groups discourage this also) anyway and don't want them here.

That is the desired behavior, we disagree on poor form, and that code is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. ;)

Site Talk / Re: Scratchpad Problem?
« on: December 28, 2015, 12:52:07 pm »
All extensions are checked for validity. Extra periods in the filename not denoting extensions are considered bad form for the purposes of this site. We could probably do things a bit differently, but it's not worth the effort.

So, .1).zip is treated as two extensions and the first was invalid.

Front Page News / Re: Site: Recent Malware Warnings
« on: December 28, 2015, 10:34:46 am »
I think it will unfortunately be permanent. It's the only way the site will pass Google's scan. Since they don't provide a complete list, we can't even just deal with the entries they think are problematic.

I thought about blocking Google Safe Browsing from downloads somehow, but I can't find any relevant information on what IP, hostname, user-agent, etc. they use for this service. I also suspect blocking them might result in an automatic flagging even if I could do so.

Robots are normally blocked from the downloads on this site via robots.txt, but Google doesn't respect that for safe browsing apparently.

Using the registration wall, we did finally pass the requested review. Warnings should start to go away now.

Front Page News / Re: Site: Recent Malware Warnings
« on: December 27, 2015, 04:11:12 pm »
Please by all means contact and harass Google if you can even find any way to do so.

Google in their infinite wisdom, offers absolutely no way to do so. You can do nothing but request your site be crawled again ONLY if you use their webmaster tools interface (which subsequently requires modifying domain host records permanently just for them!). You can't do anything about false positives. ALL downloads are now behind a registration wall and Google has been requested to re-scan. Nothing else can be done as far as I'm aware. Google won't even give a list of all offending links. They merely give you a single example link (which does happen to be the aforementioned http://www.romhacking.net/translations/1590/). It's an absolutely pathetic system. I can't believe Google would put out such junk and push for wide adoption.

Site Talk / Re: Isn't today RHDN's 10th anniversary?
« on: December 24, 2015, 02:09:22 pm »
The 23rd was indeed the 10th anniversary. :) I have been very sick for the past month and still struggling, or I would have done something. :(

Before I got sick, I had the idea of making a little collage page containing a few sentences from various people (whomever was interested) reflecting back on RHDN. Maybe a memorable community moment, how the site may have helped them, something cool they found here, someone cool they met because of the site, etc. I thought it would be cool to have a page collecting various small quotes/tidbits like that to memorialize 10 years of the site and community. I suppose we still could do something like that if there is interest. :)

I have still kept a few memorable images on the server from our early days to dust off on a special occasion...

It's been a long while, but doesn't Breath of Fire IV do this as well? At least I recall getting to play as both the antagonist and the protagonist.

I think it's fantastic that he is able to utilize abilities unique to synthesis hardware that is not possible on real instruments. I think it simply re-enforces the fact that he was a master of his craft! He wasn't composing music to be played on real instruments. He was composing music to be played on distinct sound hardware. :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 72