[Outdated] ❗ [Official] [Cracker] Egg.Crack 1.6 - Page 2 - MPGH

/Re-Approved

Originally Posted by Manevolent

I've identified the problems in EggCrack 1.6, and I'll be uploading 1.7 shortly.

Thank you for notifying me of the issue, here's what it was:

Mojang modified the way login.minecraft.netⓘ responded to HTTP POST requests; it seems as though there is an issue in the function EggCrack uses to build a poststring. For now, I've changed the method back to an HTTP GET request with the parameters in-line the URL (e.g. ?user=john&password=smith). I've run it through my own lists and found that a good majority of the accounts there are working with verifiable responses from the login servers.

I've also removed the performance clock on the thread creation method. This means that if you request 256 threads, you will start 256 threads locally instantly (As opposed to a limited, static number started every 1000ms). Please take caution when using high thread counts. I expect this to improve the performance of checks dramatically (I checked 100 accounts in less than 5 seconds with 200 threads, compared to 20 or 30 seconds before with the clock enabled).

It's showing all alts as failed, different proxies/turning off av doesn't work.

Are other people having that problem too?

Originally Posted by glw121212

It's showing all alts as failed, different proxies/turning off av doesn't work.

Are other people having that problem too?

all alts i checked before (see other post) all cam e out as failed. So did my 47k alt list (scanned 23k before started lagging and i stopped)

You need to add some fixing there. @Manevolent

Originally Posted by IWillNeverUnderstand

all alts i checked before (see other post) all cam e out as failed. So did my 47k alt list (scanned 23k before started lagging and i stopped)

You need to add some fixing there. @Manevolent

I was able to verify that a list of 100 accounts I use to test with (that had 2 reporting cracked with 1.6) is now reporting what it should be with 1.7. Have you made sure that the lists you're running report higher numbers with other stable crackers?

Regardless, I'll be searching for more issues today. The fact it lagged out on you tells me the thread clock was there for a good reason; I'll likely add an option, default enabled.

Edit: After re-running an identical job (of which I had 90 cracked, 52 failed), I found 0 cracked, all failed. Debug responses are a valid "Bad login" coming from Mojang. I'll continue working to find out what is doing this, and keep everyone posted.

Update: It's clearly some sort of identification on Mojang's side, as it appears that they have removed the "Too many failed logins" response from their login API. No bother, but this still makes me curious how the cracker may not be utilizing proxies correctly (at least, on my end).

If this is the case, and Mojang has done away with the "Too many failed logins" response, it'll make cracking rather difficult, as there is no way to know if the server has rejected your login or not, meaning the cracker does not know when to advance the password attempts list.

Second update: Trying a Yggdrasil API in place of the legacy API yields no different results (masking too many failed logins with a simple "Bad login"-type response). It may take some time to create a workaround for this, if at all possible. Please try your other checkers and crackers to see if this is more than an issue on my end.

this may be a bad idea but it should work for a while.

for checker only
1. require a user to enter 1 correct alt
2. check that 1 alt with all proxies and discard all non working ones for that session
3. check every alt in the alt list and use a new proxy from the working list very 10-20 attempts)
4. Seperate the working ones from the non working ones
5. repeat step 2-5 but instead of the entire alt list at step 3, check the alts that failed

6. add an error to display if you ran out of working proxies, with a stop button and a reset proxy list button in wich case you keep the alts checked but you
rescan ALL proxies from the file and then use the working proxies to scan the non workin list again.

Banned ip's won't respond so they will be removed from the list.
and with that error people know that they orobably need more proxies or check less alts at a time

Originally Posted by IWillNeverUnderstand

this may be a bad idea but it should work for a while.

for checker only
1. require a user to enter 1 correct alt
2. check that 1 alt with all proxies and discard all non working ones for that session
3. check every alt in the alt list and use a new proxy from the working list very 10-20 attempts)
4. Seperate the working ones from the non working ones
5. repeat step 2-5 but instead of the entire alt list at step 3, check the alts that failed

6. add an error to display if you ran out of working proxies, with a stop button and a reset proxy list button in wich case you keep the alts checked but you
rescan ALL proxies from the file and then use the working proxies to scan the non workin list again.

Banned ip's won't respond so they will be removed from the list.
and with that error people know that they orobably need more proxies or check less alts at a time

This would work, but the time involved to handle the fails of 100 unchecked alts would be extreme. Assuming the average response time for the proxies in your list is 200ms (which isn't that bad, really), and knowing 10 failures would cause the login servers to spoof the Bad login response, even with 300 proxies it becomes far too difficult (failed accounts * proxies * average response time) and would make just check time many times longer than it would be if the servers were responding normally to known proxies.

At this point, the best course of action is to wait for Mojang to make the error messages more specific; there are at least 10 better options I can think up that are much more efficient than what they've done to combat crackers recently.

Originally Posted by Manevolent

This would work, but the time involved to handle the fails of 100 unchecked alts would be extreme. Assuming the average response time for the proxies in your list is 200ms (which isn't that bad, really), and knowing 10 failures would cause the login servers to spoof the Bad login response, even with 300 proxies it becomes far too difficult (failed accounts * proxies * average response time) and would make just check time many times longer than it would be if the servers were responding normally to known proxies.

At this point, the best course of action is to wait for Mojang to make the error messages more specific; there are at least 10 better options I can think up that are much more efficient than what they've done to combat crackers recently.

It's the decent solution I thought up, I don't see why mojang would make the errors more specific, after all that would make cracking easier. However, I hope that you or someone else finds a method that is fast yet works decently well. and that formula wouldn't exactly work right since all bad proxies are removed and only the working ones are used.

Originally Posted by IWillNeverUnderstand

It's the decent solution I thought up, I don't see why mojang would make the errors more specific, after all that would make cracking easier. However, I hope that you or someone else finds a method that is fast yet works decently well. and that formula wouldn't exactly work right since all bad proxies are removed and only the working ones are used.

My guess is, when they get a few 100 tickets claiming "account hacked", they'll reverse the changes. Knowing Marc_IRL, it won't happen anytime soon.

Either I have a VERY BAD alt list, or program has got something to work on:/
(All my alts does not work.)

Originally Posted by shiwenyi

Either I have a VERY BAD alt list, or program has got something to work on:/
(All my alts does not work.)

You did not read my last update. This is not an issue with the cracker, it is Mojang's attempt to combat checkers and crackers alike, albeit very unprofessional, and extremely misleading to people who think their accounts are now hijacked because they're logging in from abused IP addresses.

10 failed logins will effectively make every login you send seem like a failed login. Since the checker relies on failed logins to advance the password list index for that account you intend to crack (or check), the cracker is fooled, and many accounts you check will come up failed.

Hey Guys, I dont know to much about cracking accounts. So I need a bit of a help could someone explain how to make a username and password list. I think i've done it one time but I realy dont remember. So if anyone would be so kind then post here or send me a PM Please. Thanks.

I just recently found your cracker, and I gotta say it looks really sleek and runs quickly. I'm looking forward to seeing this problem fixed soon. Thanks, Manevolent!

THANK LORD YOU FIXED IT!

Hey, for some reason whenever i try to Crack, for some reason it fails. I tried to create a file with a username of an account that works, and a account with it's password. When I tried to crack it it failed... Any help?

Originally Posted by VSYNCI

Hey, for some reason whenever i try to Crack, for some reason it fails. I tried to create a file with a username of an account that works, and a account with it's password. When I tried to crack it it failed... Any help?

Please read the 2nd page of the thread, thanks!

Outdated❗ [Official] [Cracker] Egg.Crack 1.6

Similar Threads