Packet Obfuscation Problem .

[Cid Kagenou]

Sorry if this is not the right spot to post , idk where should i start it , anyway ..

 

i diffed my client for the right keys , took it from the packet_db.txt i am using client 20130618 with it default keys ,

 

whenever i try to log in my server it keeps saying rejected with this error   :

 

clif_parse: Disconnecting session #8 with unknown packet version (p:0x02e6,l:19).

 

this is my packet_db.txt :

 

packet_db_ver: 40
packet_db_ver: default
packet_keys_use: default

 

thats it , am i making it wrong?

 

P.S Changed to 2013-08-07 and changed the packet keys , same thing happens. plz any idea?

Edited March 31, 2015 by spe3y

[Lord Ganja]

recompiled?

 

maybe try to look for another working custom packet keys..

 

I also encountered something like this before. Well in my case, im using 2013-12-23 client.

second and third packet key is the same. What I did is just used nkwz RO Toolkit, and look for

the packet key that works, replaced 2nd packet with same packet as the 3rd (i think this is only for 2013-12-23 client).

Just full of trial and errors but somehow it works now.

[harley]

On 30/3/2015 at 7:29 PM, Sweetie Pie said:

 

Thanks a lot for your fast replys, changing the keys fixed it , i used three same keys and pooff!! works ^^

 Thank you , already fixed it <3

Never works on me.. have the same problem

 

[Lord Ganja]

did you diff your client with packetkeys?

 

Packet First Key Encrpytion

Packet Second Key Encrpytion

Packet Third Key Encrpytion

 

[Cid Kagenou]

 

did you diff your client with packetkeys?

 

Packet First Key Encrpytion

Packet Second Key Encrpytion

Packet Third Key Encrpytion

 

 

 Yes i did , i made my custom keys with nkwz RO Toolkit , then put them in packet_db with ver 45 still rejected

[exneval]

@spe3y

 

in packet_db.txt

 

edit the "default"

packet_keys_use: default

to your custom key, since you diffed your client with custom ones, the format should be like this

packet_keys: 0xyourcustomkey1,0xyourcustomkey2,0xyourcustomkey3

Edited March 30, 2015 by exneval

[Cid Kagenou]

 

@spe3y

 

in packet_db.txt

 

edit the "default"

packet_keys_use: default

to your custom key, since you diffed your client with custom ones, the format should be like this

packet_keys: 0xyourcustomkey1,0xyourcustomkey2,0xyourcustomkey3

 

 

packet_db_ver: 45

packet_db_ver: default

packet_keys_use: 0xC2D6A42E,0xCC546ACF,0xC05D801F

 

its in this form now , diffed my client with it too , still rejected

 

P,S i restarted my server though

[Lord Ganja]

Did you test your custom keys?

 

You can test it here and see if it pass or a broken key

 

EDIT: 

 

Did you enable Packet Obfuscation in core.h?

Edited March 30, 2015 by Lord Ganja

[Cid Kagenou]

Did you test your custom keys?

 

You can test it here and see if it pass or a broken key

Passed , no error with it

 

my packet_db.txt is like this :

 

//packet_db_ver: 45

packet_db_ver: 45

packet_keys_use: 0xC2D6A42E,0xCC546ACF,0xC05D801F

 

and my mmo.h is like this :

 

    #define PACKETVER 20130807

 

my clientinfo.xml is :

 

      <version>45</version>

 

and diffed my client with the keys above , still rejected

Edited March 30, 2015 by spe3y

[Lord Ganja]

try this 

 

 

client diff

 

 

Disable Packet Encryption - no

Packet First Key Encryption - Yes

Packet Second Key Encryption - Yes

Packet Third Key Encryption - Yes

 

 

 

mmo.h

#ifndef PACKETVER
#define PACKETVER 20130807
#endif

core.h 

/// Comment to disable the official packet obfuscation support.
/// When enabled, make sure there is value for 'packet_keys' of used packet version or
/// defined 'packet_keys_use' in db/[import/]packet_db.txt.
/// This requires PACKETVER 2011-08-17 or newer.
#define PACKET_OBFUSCATION

db/packet_db.txt

packet_db_ver: 45
packet_keys_use: default

packet_keys: 0x<yourcustomkey1>,0x<yourcustomkey2>,0x<yourcustomkey3>

don't foget to recompile

[exneval]

Ah yes.. It's got rejected with any custom key...

[Cid Kagenou]

Diff :

 

 

mmo.h :

 

 

core.h :

 

 

packet keys:

 

 

Packet.db.txt :

 

\

 

 thats it , anything wrong?

[exneval]

for now.. don't hex your client with custom key.. 

 

and please use back the default key..

 

so for your case the default key is

packet_keys: 0x7E241DE0,0x5E805580,0x3D807D80 //[Shakto]

[Cid Kagenou]

recompiled?

 

maybe try to look for another working custom packet keys..

 

I also encountered something like this before. Well in my case, im using 2013-12-23 client.

second and third packet key is the same. What I did is just used nkwz RO Toolkit, and look for

the packet key that works, replaced 2nd packet with same packet as the 3rd (i think this is only for 2013-12-23 client).

Just full of trial and errors but somehow it works now.

 

Thanks a lot for your fast replys, changing the keys fixed it , i used three same keys and pooff!! works ^^

 

for now.. don't hex your client with custom key.. 

 

and please use back the default key..

 

so for your case the default key is

packet_keys: 0x7E241DE0,0x5E805580,0x3D807D80 //[Shakto]

 Thank you , already fixed it <3

[exneval]

Me too.. I also fixed it with custom keys..

Just follow the format like what @Lord Ganja said

 

Well done

[Lord Ganja]

glad to hear that  

btw you  used 3 same keys ? have you tried using wpe?

[nanakiwurtz]

A small side note, you better use the 'import folder' for any configurations that supports the import feature, to prevent future conflicts.

But something bothers my mind, currently rA only accepts 0x7FFFFFFF for maximum key value, so any higher value might give unwanted results.

 

Could you post/PM your packet keys

I want to test it further  

[nanakiwurtz]

Okay, now nkwz RO Toolkit has been updated to v1.8, please recheck your packet keys quality.

And try to use the pair which get up to 100%. If not, just randomize and recheck them again

 

Please be aware that currently the tool can still randomize the value above 0x7FFFFFFF

For now use value below than that, until I'm sure that higher value than 0x7FFFFFFF is okay to use or not