TS3 Protocol

[Splamy]

I was trying to think of anything teamspeak does that you could call potentially obscure (ie odd hashing and basing the auth flow on that. the usual stuff) . Sure, they aren't winning a best practices award, but they also aren't obtaining the worst cryptography utilization award either.

And there we are, back at the beginning, from my own quote ;)
> A little side note: the encryption is actually pretty solid, mark me surprised, i actually didn't expect that...

 

[0vert1m3]

Yes we do have the teamspeak protocol but problem with sharing it is because it would be dangerous. We found a lot of exploits because of we can manupliate the protocol. If we share it to public then more people can find more bugs and crashes and uses them maliciously maybe even sell them. This protocol can hurt a lot of people if a black hat gets his hands on it. We report all the exploits we found to teamspeak before we share them. These are my thougts but i cant make this decision alone. It must be made by all of the team members.

This is funny cuz you are not the only person who,s got the ts3 protocol.. Its not public in anyway but if u know a certain group then u can get it.. But on the other site yes they can hurt people but i think if the ts3 protocol would be public then on the first week it would do some damage but then maybe teamspeak open their eyes and get better @ Developers and not try to get money. So for me as a personi'm thinking of releasing it in a certain area of the web...

 

[Asphyxia]

This is funny cuz you are not the only person who,s got the ts3 protocol.. Its not public in anyway but if u know a certain group then u can get it.. But on the other site yes they can hurt people but i think if the ts3 protocol would be public then on the first week it would do some damage but then maybe teamspeak open their eyes and get better @ Developers and not try to get money. So for me as a personi'm thinking of releasing it in a certain area of the web...

Maybe we should have TeamSpeak 3 protocol classes.

We can sign up the TeamSpeak 3 developers.

Do we all know how many times TeamSpeak 3 pretty much developed with a "does it run?" mentality --- pretty much all throughout the beginning of development. This was their first project using the QT framework --- the TeamSpeak Systems company that is.

If their project compiled and executed, things were good and ready to go.

I rarely see any quality assurance, they seemingly have no quality team(s) to check finished results. There is obviously no security-related staff.

When they first released TeamSpeak 3 public, a funny man developed a tool that was able to grant himself Server Administrator in every fucking server. This is an example of the security controls for TeamSpeak. We can all be cautious not to throw rocks at the weak TeamSpeak window, but the only way that window is getting any stronger is if/when the windows breaks enough times to make the cost of bulletproofing worthwhile.

Security is something that evolves, it will not magically get better nor is anyone safer if security lies dormant to careless users. We should care whether the software we run is safe or not.

Passing a protocol around that is obviously already published should not do much harm. Whatever harm it does, the security cycle requires patching which obviously leads to improving security --- tightening loose bolts. If their protocol which seems to rely on the upper layer protocol TCP is opened up for inspection, sure some security issues may be sighted. When they are, they should be and will eventually be patched. This is what obscurity does though, protocols don't suck guys --- people do.

Computers just do what we tell them to.

 

[0vert1m3]

Maybe we should have TeamSpeak 3 protocol classes.

We can sign up the TeamSpeak 3 developers.

Do we all know how many times TeamSpeak 3 pretty much developed with a "does it run?" mentality --- pretty much all throughout the beginning of development. This was their first project using the QT framework --- the TeamSpeak Systems company that is.

If their project compiled and executed, things were good and ready to go.

I rarely see any quality assurance, they seemingly have no quality team(s) to check finished results. There is obviously no security-related staff.

When they first released TeamSpeak 3 public, a funny man developed a tool that was able to grant himself Server Administrator in every fucking server. This is an example of the security controls for TeamSpeak. We can all be cautious not to throw rocks at the weak TeamSpeak window, but the only way that window is getting any stronger is if/when the windows breaks enough times to make the cost of bulletproofing worthwhile.

Security is something that evolves, it will not magically get better nor is anyone safer if security lies dormant to careless users. We should care whether the software we run is safe or not.

Passing a protocol around that is obviously already published should not do much harm. Whatever harm it does, the security cycle requires patching which obviously leads to fixing security --- tightening loose bolts.

I agree with the most but i think its pretty easy to harden a software like teamspeak but also they don't even care, the Employees of teamspeak it's a joke, the support is a joke, the business customer support is also a joke.....

 

[RSX]

This is funny cuz you are not the only person who,s got the ts3 protocol..

Clearly this was intended to be a comedy thread.

Its not public in anyway but if u know a certain group then u can get it..

Ye, it's called the select 'we're not retarded and [not so] secretly despise leaching kids' group.

 

[Asphyxia]

This is a comedy thread, TeamSpeak 3 is comedyware at that.

 

[0vert1m3]

Clearly this was intended to be a comedy thread.

Ye, it's called the select 'we're not retarded and [not so] secretly despite leaching kids' group.

Yea and now your mad ?, and u didn't even know the proper definition of "leecher" and the kid and retarded didnt make it better.. Think and then write

 

[RSX]

Maybe we should have TeamSpeak 3 protocol classes.

We can sign up the TeamSpeak 3 developers.

Seems like a silly idea that will consume a lot of time, effort, and maybe even money. You might as well get it over and done with a wiki post.

Do we all know how many times TeamSpeak 3 pretty much developed with a "does it run?" mentality --- pretty much all throughout the beginning of development. This was their first project using the QT framework --- the TeamSpeak Systems company that is.
If their project compiled and executed, things were good and ready to go.
I rarely see any quality assurance, they seemingly have no quality team(s) to check finished results. There is obviously no security-related staff.

People may laugh at that, although, nobody has been able to beat them. You decide which one is more humorous. There most likely isn't security staff due to the fact any non-brain dead developer can implement things securely. That's unless we are talking about high school students acting like they are the shit because they took computer science and figured out how to do frontends. I'm neither implying they are stupid or brain dead, but at least, no time or effort has been put in.

When they first released TeamSpeak 3 public, a funny man developed a tool that was able to grant himself Server Administrator in every fucking server. This is an example of the security controls for TeamSpeak. We can all be cautious not to throw rocks at the weak TeamSpeak window, but the only way that window is getting any stronger is if/when the windows breaks enough times to make the cost of bulletproofing worthwhile.

That was years ago. Perhaps then it would justify releasing everything in an attempt to make it secure by the community. I highly doubt anybody that can't research it themselves can find a ground breaking issue like that.

Yea and now your mad ?, and u didn't even know the proper definition of "leecher" and the kid and retarded didnt make it better.. Think and then write

Fine, leeching not leaching. That still doesn't invalid my point that you can't even compose a sentence and that you attempt to make silly localhost jokes whilst trying to make ts/others look dumb.

 

[0vert1m3]

Seems like a silly idea that will consume a lot of time, effort, and maybe even money. You might as well get it over and done with a wiki post.

People may laugh at that, although, nobody has been able to beat them. You decide which one is more humorous. There most likely isn't security staff due to the fact any non-brain dead developer can implement things securely. That's unless we are talking about high school students acting like they are the shit because they took computer science and figured out how to do frontends. I'm neither implying they are stupid or brain dead, but at least, no time or effort has been put in.


That was years ago. Perhaps then it would justify releasing everything in an attempt to make it secure by the community. I highly doubt anybody that can't research it themselves can find a ground breaking issue like that.


Fine, leeching not leaching. That still doesn't invalid my point that you can't even compose a sentence and that you attempt to make silly localhost jokes whilst trying to make ts/others look dumb.

And now u a writing a book ? KK.

leeching
To download without giving anything in return, esp. a huge file. To suck (bandwidth) dry, as a leech would.

Also: 'leech-light' - the HD activity light when on 'full'.
I'm leeching a movie from this guy.

Getting a good rate - my leech-light is on solid!

@ http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=leeching

 

[Asphyxia]

So, let's say for the sake of example we leave all the TeamSpeak 3 windows alone and promise not to throw any rocks in strength testing.

What becomes better about the TeamSpeak 3 project? What if we all just agreed not to enter the houses of others, then we could just leave all our doors unlocked --- great idea.

 

[RSX]

So, let's say for the sake of example we leave all the TeamSpeak 3 windows alone and promise not to throw any rocks in strength testing.

What becomes better about the TeamSpeak 3 project? What if we all just agreed not to enter the houses of others, then we could just leave all our doors unlocked --- great idea.

I'm not suggesting that, but at least restrict resources that can be used by anybody and their mother.
Here's another analogy:
Would it be appropriate to revoke access to explosive materials sold in shops in an area struck by terrorism because the military have legitimate uses for them
Would it be appropriate to revoke access to research tools accessible to the public in an area full of abusers and skids because researchers have legitimate uses for them

 

[RSX]

And now u a writing a book ? KK.

leeching
To download without giving anything in return, esp. a huge file. To suck (bandwidth) dry, as a leech would.

Also: 'leech-light' - the HD activity light when on 'full'.
I'm leeching a movie from this guy.

Getting a good rate - my leech-light is on solid!

@ http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=leeching

Here's a tip, in order to win an argument, don't cry about how lengthy a post is. Also, quoting an illegitimate dictionary hurts your cause.

 

[0vert1m3]

Here's a tip, in order to win an argument, don't cry about how lengthy a post is. Also, quoting an illegitimate dictionary hurts your cause.

Here's a tip dont write 2 times in a row it looks stupid.

 

[Asphyxia]

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution reads: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

I know the entire world is not the United States, but I strongly believe we should have the right to cyber militias and everyone should have the right to the security testing of any and all software they run on their devices. This should be a basic digital human right, who is the bad guy? The terrorist enabler or the terrorist? Anyone with a good pair of fists can do great damage, we shouldn't cut every person's hands off --- should we?

 

[RSX]

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution reads: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

I know the entire world is not the United States, but I strongly believe we should have the right to cyber militias and everyone should have the right to the security testing of any and all software they run on their devices. This should be a basic digital human right, who is the bad guy? The terrorist enabler or the terrorist? Anyone with a good pair of fists can do great damage, we shouldn't cut every person's hands off --- should we?

Well, considering in both situations, the enablers are fully aware of the people they are aiding, they should at least accept some moral responsibility. If that is such an unreasonable statement, then drug [farm] busts wouldn't be a thing. Whether or not the war on drugs was an efficient move or even a regrettable one, busting those who provide sure seemed like a popular option.

 

[RSX]

Here's a tip dont write 2 times in a row it looks stupid.

There's not speaking English natively and/or having a few brain farts and then there's this.
https://reece.sx/ZgR1kvEZHNiI680

 

[Asphyxia]

Just for the sake of spicing up this discussion, I have to ask.
How do you defeat terrorism? Does prohibiting terrorism work, or prohibiting people from taking bottles of water on planes?

 

[RSX]

Just for the sake of spicing up this discussion, I have to ask.
How do you defeat terrorism? Does prohibiting terrorism work, or prohibiting people from taking bottles of water on planes?

The only ways to combat it are out of reach. For instance: Setting off nuclear bombs making the entire middle east unlivable, therefore preventing ISIS and other Islamic terror organisations from spreading their propaganda, and therefore, preventing them from spreading their cowardly signs of defeat (IE going for a little drive in a truck in Paris.). Meanwhile, you're also going to want to get rid of any individuals that share the same ideals as them, and ones who think it's appropriate to follow a book blindly that's full of intolerance, barbaric acts, torture, and pure hatred. Evolutionary, the fighters are the winners. Either the advanced peaceful first world needs to start shooting some Muslims or they need to deal with the fact that 'it's normal to live with terrorism in a large city' (- Mayor of London)

 

[Asphyxia]

Interesting thoughts, I always find the way people answer to combatting terrorism funny. It is almost always another variation of terrorism. If not, a slow death in defeat to the terrorists. You almost have to overpower terrorism with stronger terrorism.

 

[RSX]

Interesting thoughts, I always find the way people answer to combatting terrorism funny. It is almost always another variation of terrorism.

At the end of the day, we're talking about human life. I know I sure as shit prefer mine over someones I don't know, and I also know that, I would also prefer the most advanced race and species life to survive. It's more or less the case of, if you want to endanger me, I'm better than you, so I would much rather blow your fucking brains out.