• Zomg (unregistered)

    A hacking tool has been discovered in the following comment so the form was not submitted.

  • Alan (unregistered) in reply to Zomg

    Posting frist is often a mistake.

  • EmperorOfCanada (unregistered)

    If an anti-hacking tool is packaged with some crap software I suspect that the tool is in fact spyware/adware and thus is in and of itself a hacking tool.

  • Errant (unregistered)
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Ethan (unregistered)

    Why is "using this method is often a mistake" a WTF? Admittedly it could have been worded better, but all it's saying is "despite the fact that this method is public, you probably don't want to actually call it". This sort of thing happens all the time, as methods have to be public in order to implement an interface or allow cross-package calls.

  • Lupus.Umbrae (unregistered)

    I'm still waiting for a anti-hacking tool that recognizes itself as a hacking tool...

  • Inhibeo (unregistered) in reply to Ethan
    Ethan:
    Why is "using this method is often a mistake" a WTF?

    I agree. Perfectly concise documentation that say "If you wish to use this method in the course of normal programming, you're probably on the wrong path.

    Is it not enterprisey enough or something?

  • JJ (unregistered) in reply to Ethan
    Comment held for moderation.
  • 123test (unregistered)
    "This is an online form for adding money to your student card," writes Ben "the first criteria has been there for a while, but the second was showed up after I tried to make a $15 deposit."
    The error message actually makes sense. They make a -$15 booking to your credit card. Would be better had they forgotten to check for this. Burp Suite is your friend.
  • Anonymous Coward (unregistered) in reply to Errant
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Anonymous (unregistered)

    I can well believe the Facebook one. The amount of times I see people at work sitting at their desks hammering the F5 key is just pathetic.

    F5 F5 F5, I need status NOW!

  • amischiefr (cs) in reply to JJ
    JJ:
    Ethan:
    Why is "using this method is often a mistake" a WTF? Admittedly it could have been worded better, but all it's saying is "despite the fact that this method is public, you probably don't want to actually call it". This sort of thing happens all the time, as methods have to be public in order to implement an interface or allow cross-package calls.

    Because they didn't use Java annotations:

    @UsingThisMethodIsOftenA(value=mistake) public Model read(java.lang.String)

    Or @Depricated works, but I guess yours is more enterprisey.
  • MRAB (unregistered)

    The number of Citrix licenses looks like it's -1 (for "unknown"?) being treated as an unsigned 32-bit integer.

  • JJ (unregistered) in reply to amischiefr
    Comment held for moderation.
  • jspenguin (cs)

    It looks like they have about 4.2 billion available licenses. What probably happened was they were using some licenses, the number got reset to 0, and they removed one, which caused the unsigned counter to wrap around to 4,294,965,295.

  • JJ (unregistered) in reply to JJ
    Comment held for moderation.
  • kastein (cs) in reply to MRAB
    MRAB:
    The number of Citrix licenses looks like it's -1 (for "unknown"?) being treated as an unsigned 32-bit integer.
    That's about what I was thinking... 4294967295 Citrix licenses? Where did they find that many computers to run it on?!

    I can't wait till 64 bit computing is more ubiquitous. Should make underflow/overflow/signedness issues even more comically obvious.

    jspenguin:
    It looks like they have about 4.2 billion available licenses. What probably happened was they were using some licenses, the number got reset to 0, and they removed one, which caused the unsigned counter to wrap around to 4,294,965,295.
    Could be, but I'm betting that GetLicensesInUse() returned -1 for fail status and some idiot forgot to check it (and needs to be beaten into submission). ps, it's 967 :P

    Every time you get email from 23:59:59 on Dec 31 1969, you can thank someone, somewhere, for forgetting to check if the return value from their time retrieval function was -1 or not... Same goes for the AIM servers when all your buddies have an online or idle time up around 49710 days (or less, if they have actually been online/idle for a few days)

  • mK (unregistered)

    comment hacked

  • keeperofkeys (cs)

    Using Java is often a mistake, but what's wrong with that overloaded read method in particular?

  • Dave (unregistered) in reply to Inhibeo
    Inhibeo:
    Ethan:
    Why is "using this method is often a mistake" a WTF?

    I agree. Perfectly concise documentation that say "If you wish to use this method in the course of normal programming, you're probably on the wrong path.

    Is it not enterprisey enough or something?

    I wish more documentation would tell you that. Can't count the number of times I've stumbled upon a useful-looking method only to find it to be a waste of time.

  • Code Dependent (cs)
    the first criteria has been there for a while
    <grammarNazi> "Criteria" is plural. The word for a single instance is "criterion". </grammarNazi>
  • A (unregistered) in reply to keeperofkeys
    keeperofkeys:
    Using Java is often a mistake, but what's wrong with that overloaded read method in particular?
    If you follow the link you see the following which even explains why it's 'probably wrong' to use this method:
    Using this method is often a mistake. It is generally better to use an InputStream if possible. read(InputStream,String), otherwise there is a danger of a mismatch between the character encoding of say the FileReader and the character encoding of the data in the file.
  • SR (unregistered) in reply to Alan
    Alan:
    Posting frist is often a mistake.

    Agreed. You dodged a bullet there.

  • Drew (unregistered) in reply to JJ
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Procedural (unregistered)

    You don't understand accounting Ben; it is a pre-paid credit, it is therefore owed to you by the company until you spend it all, so it is -15. If you go with positive numbers you'll mess up our back-end accounting systems and we just won't let a student do that. We've had layers upon layers of people give their approval on this Ben, so your opinion really doesn't matter.

  • Ozz (unregistered) in reply to Errant
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Code Dependent (cs) in reply to Drew
    Drew:
    CAPTCHA: jumentum. This thread's getting real jumentum now!
    You keep using that word. I do not think it says what jument to say.
  • Zach Bora (unregistered) in reply to Lupus.Umbrae
    Lupus.Umbrae:
    I'm still waiting for a anti-hacking tool that recognizes itself as a hacking tool...

    I once downloaded a hotfix for McAfee and after running it, McAfee warned me that a program tried to modify the McAfee registry...

  • AlpineR (cs)

    I see Facebook get blamed for lag in Starcraft frequently, so maybe it's true. It doesn't seem to me that the network load should be that heavy, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it does a lot of inefficient communication in the background.

  • Technical Thug (cs)

    Resizing images in the browser is often a mistake.

    Seriously, TDWTF. Don't do it.

  • Jay (unregistered)

    At least we know the Citrix folks won't be facing bankrupcy anytime soon. Not once they collect the license fee for 4 billion licenses.

  • Jay (unregistered)

    I was once surfing for some information on password encryption when one link I clicked on turned out to be a hacker web site, offering a password-cracking program for free downloads.

    And I thought to myself, Who in his right mind would voluntarily download software and run it on his own computer, that he knows comes from a site that advertises itself as being a bunch of hackers and virus writers? How dumb do you have to be?

    Captcha: "aptent": A temporary structure for storing applications.

  • ambrosen (unregistered) in reply to kastein
    kastein:
    MRAB:
    The number of Citrix licenses looks like it's -1 (for "unknown"?) being treated as an unsigned 32-bit integer.
    That's about what I was thinking... 4294967295 Citrix licenses? Where did they find that many computers to run it on?!
    Well, at least they're forward thinking enough to be using IPv6 anyway.
  • 4FF2e!014q (unregistered)

    The Facebook one is no WTF. It's sensible.

    My girlfriend asked to use my computer (running Linux) for a sec to check her Facebook something-something. I refused.

    I'm afraid I can't appreciate people who spend their spare time using FB.

  • pitchingchris (cs) in reply to 4FF2e!014q

    Less than 0.00 must mean that they owe me money now

  • Doctor Funk (unregistered) in reply to 4FF2e!014q

    Right with you there. This whole Internet thing is just a passing fad, anyway.

  • Crabs (unregistered) in reply to AlpineR
    AlpineR:
    I see Facebook get blamed for lag in Starcraft frequently, so maybe it's true. It doesn't seem to me that the network load should be that heavy, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it does a lot of inefficient communication in the background.

    If you think about how their chat function works, you realize how much bandwidth facebook uses. It basically sends an XMLHttpRequest every half a second or so, as far as I can tell, checking their database to see if you have any messages. And if there is an update, it sends back a reload request for all the updatable sections for the whole page (including your chat list, and your status on the main page).

    Not to mention it loads sounds to play when you get a message and aren't focused on it.

    If you could turn off the chat bar completely, Facebook wouldn't slow anything down, really.

  • Technical Thug (cs) in reply to Crabs
    Crabs:
    If you think about how their chat function works, you realize how much bandwidth facebook uses. It basically sends an XMLHttpRequest every half a second or so, as far as I can tell, checking their database to see if you have any messages. And if there is an update, it sends back a reload request for all the updatable sections for the whole page (including your chat list, and your status on the main page).

    Not to mention it loads sounds to play when you get a message and aren't focused on it.

    If you could turn off the chat bar completely, Facebook wouldn't slow anything down, really.

    How does that compare to Gmail's chat feature? I know it doesn't reload a whole bunch of stuff, but it must poll the server fairly frequently for updates...

  • chrismcb (cs) in reply to 4FF2e!014q
    4FF2e!014q:
    The Facebook one is no WTF. It's sensible.

    My girlfriend asked to use my computer (running Linux) for a sec to check her Facebook something-something. I refused.

    I'm afraid I can't appreciate people who spend their spare time using FB.

    WTF? You think a website is stupid, so it isn't a WTF that a inetcafe doesn't want you to use it?

    As for your girlfriend, if she had asked you to borrow your computer so she could check her email, what would you have said? Would you refuse because you can't appreciate people who spend their spare time reading email?

  • Technical Thug (cs) in reply to chrismcb
    chrismcb:
    As for your girlfriend, if she had asked you to borrow your computer so she could check her email, what would you have said?
    I would have said "why, so you can talk with the man you're cheating on me with?"
  • operagost (cs) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    I can well believe the Facebook one. The amount of times I see people at work sitting at their desks hammering the F5 key is just pathetic.

    F5 F5 F5, I need status NOW!

    Amusing, because they recently AJAXed it to check for updates periodically and post a link saying something like, "Click here to see 4 updates." So it now saturates the network all by itself.

  • operagost (cs) in reply to 4FF2e!014q
    4FF2e!014q:
    The Facebook one is no WTF. It's sensible.

    My girlfriend asked to use my computer (running Linux) for a sec to check her Facebook something-something. I refused.

    I'm afraid I can't appreciate people who spend their spare time using FB.

    ... when using it here is so much more-- something.

  • csm (unregistered) in reply to 4FF2e!014q
    4FF2e!014q:
    The Facebook one is no WTF. It's sensible.

    My girlfriend asked to use my computer (running Linux) for a sec to check her Facebook something-something. I refused.

    I'm afraid I can't appreciate people who spend their spare time using FB.

    Sounds like more of a personal problem than a bandwidth problem. Maybe it would be less of a WTF if the sign read "Facebook is not appreciated here. You have been refused."

  • Technical Thug (cs)

    The network problem between Facebook and my girlfriend needs to be beaten into submission.

  • Code Dependent (cs) in reply to Technical Thug
    Technical Thug:
    I would have said "why, so you can talk with the man you're cheating on me with?"
    ...to which the obvious response would be, "Which one?"
  • Shamefully admitting to using FB (unregistered) in reply to Crabs
    Crabs:
    AlpineR:
    I see Facebook get blamed for lag in Starcraft frequently, so maybe it's true. It doesn't seem to me that the network load should be that heavy, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it does a lot of inefficient communication in the background.

    If you think about how their chat function works, you realize how much bandwidth facebook uses. It basically sends an XMLHttpRequest every half a second or so, as far as I can tell, checking their database to see if you have any messages. And if there is an update, it sends back a reload request for all the updatable sections for the whole page (including your chat list, and your status on the main page).

    Not to mention it loads sounds to play when you get a message and aren't focused on it.

    If you could turn off the chat bar completely, Facebook wouldn't slow anything down, really.

    Click on it and select 'offline'.....

  • Shamefully admitting to using FB (unregistered) in reply to Shamefully admitting to using FB
    Shamefully admitting to using FB:
    Crabs:
    AlpineR:
    I see Facebook get blamed for lag in Starcraft frequently, so maybe it's true. It doesn't seem to me that the network load should be that heavy, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it does a lot of inefficient communication in the background.

    If you think about how their chat function works, you realize how much bandwidth facebook uses. It basically sends an XMLHttpRequest every half a second or so, as far as I can tell, checking their database to see if you have any messages. And if there is an update, it sends back a reload request for all the updatable sections for the whole page (including your chat list, and your status on the main page).

    Not to mention it loads sounds to play when you get a message and aren't focused on it.

    If you could turn off the chat bar completely, Facebook wouldn't slow anything down, really.

    Click on it and select 'offline'.....

    Oops, looks like they've changed it.... Click on the chat bar, select 'Options', select 'Go Offline'

  • Mike (unregistered) in reply to chrismcb
    chrismcb:
    4FF2e!014q:
    The Facebook one is no WTF. It's sensible.

    My girlfriend asked to use my computer (running Linux) for a sec to check her Facebook something-something. I refused.

    I'm afraid I can't appreciate people who spend their spare time using FB.

    WTF? You think a website is stupid, so it isn't a WTF that a inetcafe doesn't want you to use it?

    As for your girlfriend, if she had asked you to borrow your computer so she could check her email, what would you have said? Would you refuse because you can't appreciate people who spend their spare time reading email?

    "Running Linux" - the very fact that that had to be clarified should have immediately alerted you to the fact that things MUST BE a certain way. This includes an i-cafe', of course. If Linux users don't like FB, then FB must be stopped at all costs!!

  • Borrrrrrrreeeeeeeedom. (unregistered)

    The Nexon one doesn't really surprise me.... But they still want you to voluntarily charge NX down there.

    Some of their "anti-hacking" tools are just buggy at times depending on the game (or if the program is a new implementation), and that particular game (Combat Arms) is a relatively newer one from them (Still working out the -first few months- kinks). (They do kind of work like Trojans though, as they send data back to the servers about your "activities", especially if you are a suspected "hacker", etc.)

  • db (unregistered)

    Facebook can be a WTF. The real reason one of the users here bitched at me and her manager to upgrade her computer was purely to be powerful enough to display Facebook. Her actual job was running stuff on a cluster and using the PC as a fairly dumb terminal.

Leave a comment on “Ad Hacked”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article