#21
Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:51 AM
#22
Posted 09 November 2012 - 11:03 AM
In The Line You Provided
if os.computerID() = SERVERID then shell.run("XoXOSLS") else while true do shell.run("XoXOS") end end
I Placed At The Bottom Of The Startup Like So.
local sPath = ".:/rom/programs" if turtle then sPath = sPath..":/rom/programs/turtle" else sPath = sPath..":/rom/programs/computer" end if http then sPath = sPath..":/rom/programs/http" end shell.setPath( sPath ) help.setPath( "/rom/help" ) shell.setAlias( "ls", "list" ) shell.setAlias( "dir", "list" ) shell.setAlias( "cp", "copy" ) shell.setAlias( "mv", "move" ) shell.setAlias( "rm", "delete" ) if fs.exists( "/rom/autorun" ) and fs.isDir( "/rom/autorun" ) then local tFiles = fs.list( "/rom/autorun" ) table.sort( tFiles ) for n, sFile in ipairs( tFiles ) do if string.sub( sFile, 1, 1 ) ~= "." then local sPath = "/rom/autorun/"..sFile if not fs.isDir( sPath ) then shell.run( sPath ) end end end end if os.computerID() = 32 then shell.run("XoXOSLS") else while true do shell.run("XoXOS") end end
but It Is Coming Up With The Error
bios:206: [string "startup"]:33: 'then' expected
Please Help Me Fix This
The Line 33 Is The Line He Provided In Startup
#24
#25
Posted 09 November 2012 - 11:26 AM
#26
Posted 09 November 2012 - 11:35 AM
#27
Posted 09 November 2012 - 11:54 AM
Major changes
- Added DevNet . Chat for Devs
- Added version for turtles, lets users use excavate and tunnel..
Minor changes:
- Added Pastebin support into the UI
- Maybe some bugfixes if I found any, dont remember.
#28
Posted 09 November 2012 - 10:43 PM
XoX, on 09 November 2012 - 11:54 AM, said:
Major changes
- Added DevNet . Chat for Devs
- Added version for turtles, lets users use excavate and tunnel..
Minor changes:
- Added Pastebin support into the UI
- Maybe some bugfixes if I found any, dont remember.
My point is that to protect a server you do not deny access to features, you have to fix the bugs and let people do what they want. Somebody could spend a while coding a script that exploits the bugs, try to use it on a server that has patched the bugs, then the malicious coder will then rage quit after finding the bugs have been patched. Do you see my point now? You never want to change the base place for coding in ComputerCraft, if there is a bug patch it, don't just restrict access to the main part of the mod.
As for the code, you could of done better on indenting and comments. Also, the code could of been better. The base propose of it is to protect the server, which is done well, however in my opinion not in an ethical way.
#29
Posted 10 November 2012 - 03:13 AM
Human, on 09 November 2012 - 10:43 PM, said:
XoX, on 09 November 2012 - 11:54 AM, said:
Major changes
- Added DevNet . Chat for Devs
- Added version for turtles, lets users use excavate and tunnel..
Minor changes:
- Added Pastebin support into the UI
- Maybe some bugfixes if I found any, dont remember.
My point is that to protect a server you do not deny access to features, you have to fix the bugs and let people do what they want. Somebody could spend a while coding a script that exploits the bugs, try to use it on a server that has patched the bugs, then the malicious coder will then rage quit after finding the bugs have been patched. Do you see my point now? You never want to change the base place for coding in ComputerCraft, if there is a bug patch it, don't just restrict access to the main part of the mod.
As for the code, you could of done better on indenting and comments. Also, the code could of been better. The base propose of it is to protect the server, which is done well, however in my opinion not in an ethical way.
Your entire argument so far is that it could be done simply with bug-fixing but your logic is flawed because it is based on your believe that it is possible to fix all bugs. I bet you that if you set up a server with whatever bugs fixed etc, I would still find a way to crash it with computercraft.
Also, it seems as if you think that as soon as someone says "I know Lua" they get dev access on my server. No, if I see someone has played for a few days and built a house and town, etc that's when they even become eligible, because if they are actually willing to waste all that time just to crash the server once and then get banned then sure, go ahead.
No matter how good your bug fixing is, if there is even a single bug left that can be exploited then ANYONE can join and crash your server without any effort.
With this there can 10000 bugs that could crash the server but no one can abuse them because the time they would have to spend on the server to get access to computercraft just isn't worth it, and the people who are actually interested in staying can play normally and eventually ask for access.
As for what you said about my code.
The main XoXOS file is tabbed fine now, the others aren't because I wrote them ingame most likely.
As for comments, as I don't plan to show this code to anyone who plans to learn from it I don't comment, no need to comment if I'm the only one reading it.
And don't just say "Could be done better" without suggesting even a single thing I could improve.
#30
Posted 10 November 2012 - 09:47 AM
Think about it this way, if you are a game dev and there is a map that has a glitch in it, are you going to take the map out or are you going to fix the glitch?
I used to grief a lot. I would spend about a week doing recon on a server and gaining people's trust just to destroy everything. Also, you can exit out of your program if you cause one of the programs to crash some how. Also, tell me how you would know who crashed the server? I can easily name quite a few exploits in ComputerCraft 1.3 that can crash a server fairly quickly. Two of them are, the coroutine exploit and DVX.1(Abuses rednet and the FS API).
Now if you would excuse me, I am going to go play some Medal Of Honor: Warfighter.
#31
Posted 10 November 2012 - 11:59 AM
Human, on 10 November 2012 - 09:47 AM, said:
Think about it this way, if you are a game dev and there is a map that has a glitch in it, are you going to take the map out or are you going to fix the glitch?
I used to grief a lot. I would spend about a week doing recon on a server and gaining people's trust just to destroy everything. Also, you can exit out of your program if you cause one of the programs to crash some how. Also, tell me how you would know who crashed the server? I can easily name quite a few exploits in ComputerCraft 1.3 that can crash a server fairly quickly. Two of them are, the coroutine exploit and DVX.1(Abuses rednet and the FS API).
Now if you would excuse me, I am going to go play some Medal Of Honor: Warfighter.
You are again completely disregarding my statement about your logic being flawed because it is simply not possible to fix all bugs, Also, if you exit out of the other scripts you simply return to XoXOS, the script it was loaded from.
#32
Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:08 PM
#36
Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:55 PM
XoX, on 10 November 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:
Funny shit. Leave it to Mk to realize something that is obvious.
XoX, on 10 November 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:
Ever heard of bytecode?
#37
Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:04 PM
Human, on 10 November 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:
No idea what you mean.
Human, on 10 November 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:
Ever heard of bytecode?
No idea what you mean.
#38
Posted 10 November 2012 - 02:28 PM
XoX, on 10 November 2012 - 01:04 PM, said:
seriously though
i dont get it :S
#39
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users