the extremes of bug compatibility

http://0xeb.net/?p=65

as we know, one man's bug is another man's feature. this is a pretty fun read about how far some blizzardfags went to emulate a buffer overflow and its read/write primitves which were often used in modding.

>>19
nice attempt at moving the goalpost, anus. in >>13 you said this:

Also consider C-based exploits enable homebrew, DRM bypasses, runtime patching (aka monkey patching, for closed source binaries)and execution(jump to buffer), numerous reverse engineering schemes(C is notoriously close to Asm, making RE much simpler),game hacks/mods not approved by publishers, etc.
In general C gives a Joe Hacker more power vs large organizations, making all software pliable and "modifiable".

which implies that C is easier to modify and reverse engineer simpler, which gives an individual power over organizations. then, when I tell you that this is even easier to do in most of the HLLs (which would imply even more power given to the individual) you start with the elitist bullshit how this is not TEH REAL RE.

either be an elitist and glorify bare metal reverse engineering and work required to do it or praise the ease of doing it. you can't have it both ways - it can't be good because it's easy and also good because it's not easy. if we talk strictly about empowering individual programmers to RE the program, HLLs are clear winners