Someone just sent me this link : MPA3 + NaughtyBank

[sonofsam]

http://www.naughtybank.com/no_shaving_update.sql

is this custom code? or is this feature available with the new mpa3?

[Chio The Pirate]

YARGH! Is that what it looks like?

[sonofsam]

Originally Posted by Chio The Pirate

YARGH! Is that what it looks like?

i dunno... it's interesting to say the least

[MrIzzz]

see sig placed for possible long threaded drama

[DateDoc]

interesting

[Manowar]

holy shit!

[xlogger]

So what it says "no_shaving"... I think its great they are not shaving.

[polish_aristocrat]

[Trax]

major sig spot lol

[Trax]

maybe thats the update from MPA2 to MPA3
now without shaving lol

[xclusive]

wow that dont look right

[xlogger]

Everyone says see sig but anyone even know what those code means?

[TheSenator]

Hmmm... where is Smokey

[TheSenator]

So, is that code to prevent shaving?

[fuzebox]

Some of the field names are very interesting... I wonder if the _r in stuff like uniques_r, sales_r, represents "real"???

signups_paid... now that's a doozy

[Jakke PNG]

I'm not a pro with sql by any stretch of imagination, but without knowing MPA database structure and whatever other mods are done to the script, there's probably no way to decipher that..

[Trax]

script looks like removing all the old colums from the old MPA2 interface which used to show all kinds of fake data like signups and signups shown

no drama
still spot sig

[woj]

[QuaWee]

Originally Posted by TheSenator

So, is that code to prevent shaving?

nice sig

[DamageX]

Originally Posted by TheSenator

Hmmm... where is Smokey

They didn't buy his sig.

[fuzebox]

Originally Posted by Trax

script looks like removing all the old colums from the old MPA2 interface which used to show all kinds of fake data like signups and signups shown

no drama
still spot sig

Why would the MPA2 database structure have tables prefixed with "mpa3_" ?

[Trax]

i am just saying that all those vars used in this code heavily remind me of the ones used in MPA2 from screenshots ive seen

[SmokeyTheBear]

you guys are freaking out over nothing...

it says NO shaving update

[xLaborJames]

sig..drama..eek

[TheSenator]

Originally Posted by QuaWee

nice sig

My sig is so cool that I jerk off to it.

[fuzebox]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

you guys are freaking out over nothing...

it says NO shaving update

Looks to me like it is removing the shaving tables from mpa3.

But then that's just a wild guess, evidence is inconclusive.

[Manowar]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

you guys are freaking out over nothing...

it says NO shaving update

why is shaving there in the first place ?

[Theo]

whats the date this file was uploaded you unix gurus?

[Lace]

Wow...fishy to say the least

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by Manowar

why is shaving there in the first place ?

it was kind of a "tongue in cheek" comment lol , kind of like a im-not-a-murderer insurance.. well if your not a murderer , what would you need the insurance for

[xclusive]

Hmmm wonder if either side knows about this thread yet? Also any other MPA3 programs have this?

[Shoehorn!]

Oh boy, this thread will get interesting.

[StuartD]

Why the hell would anyone have something like that on the server? And in a non-php format that would output to a browser no less?

[RevSand]

Originally Posted by TheSenator

My sig is so cool that I jerk off to it.

Hey me too....

I woudl liek to hear soe word from ppl in the know...

[StuartD]

Anyway, the only thing is seems to be doing is dropping all of the shaving fields from the database that used to be there from mpa2.

alter table "DROP" means to remove the field from the database. And that's all it's doing over and over and over again except for one spot where it changes a field from active_p to active_ft_p and the next section under that adds a few fields.

So, I can't say for 100% certainty without seeing everything else, but it seems to be removing the shaving module that was installed automatically with mpa2.

active_paid, signup_paid and partner_paid were likely the fields that had the amount paid to the affiliate AFTER a certain amount was shaved. Those fields are now non-existant after being dropped.

(And I'm anti mpa... mostly, mpa2... because of that shaving module, so I have no reason to back them up for anything. It's just how I read the code).

[Anna_O]

Originally Posted by woj

[Radiate]

mmm... definitely interesting

[elitetec]

http://www.toplistblog.com/addurl.php Increase your traffic

[sonofsam]

why is everything in the code mpa3 if it's from the older version?

[StuartD]

Originally Posted by sonofsam

why is everything in the code mpa3 if it's from the older version?

mpa2 had a shaving module. mpa3 is a new system, but it uses the old system so no data is lost, or links need to be changed.

Hense, the shaving module needs to be removed.

[sonofsam]

Originally Posted by StuartD

mpa2 had a shaving module. mpa3 is a new system, but it uses the old system so no data is lost, or links need to be changed.

Hense, the shaving module needs to be removed.

ALTER TABLE `mpa3_active_referral_stats` DROP `uniques_r` ,
DROP `signups_r` ;


ALTER TABLE `mpa3_active_stats` DROP `uniques_r` ,
DROP `free_trials_r` ,
DROP `trials_r` ,
DROP `full_price_r` ,
DROP `payout_r` ;

if this shaving module was from the older one... shouldn't it look like this then ?

ALTER TABLE `mpa2_active_referral_stats` DROP `uniques_r` ,
DROP `signups_r` ;


ALTER TABLE `mpa2_active_stats` DROP `uniques_r` ,
DROP `free_trials_r` ,
DROP `trials_r` ,
DROP `full_price_r` ,
DROP `payout_r` ;

[StuartD]

Originally Posted by sonofsam

if this shaving module was from the older one... shouldn't it look like this then ?

ALTER TABLE `mpa2_active_referral_stats` DROP `uniques_r` ,
DROP `signups_r` ;


ALTER TABLE `mpa2_active_stats` DROP `uniques_r` ,
DROP `free_trials_r` ,
DROP `trials_r` ,
DROP `full_price_r` ,
DROP `payout_r` ;

Possibly, as I said... I haven't seen all of the code or know exactly how it works, which is why I also said that I can't be absolutely certain... just how it looks.

Now, if mpa3 installs and automatically upgrades the prefix of the database from mpa2 to mpa3 and THEN does all the work on it.... then the code might look as it is now.

And as I said before, I'm not trying to defend them... for all I know, this could be just as bad or even worse than how it looks initially. But for all we know, without seeing more, this could simply be a removal system from old to new.

[Manowar]

Originally Posted by elitetec

http://www.toplistblog.com/addurl.php Increase your traffic

and you wonder why people hate you?

[KCat]

bump for Naughty Bank

[OY]

Originally Posted by sonofsam

http://www.naughtybank.com/no_shaving_update.sql

is this custom code? or is this feature available with the new mpa3?

Sonofsam, as you most likely know MPA3 has been out now for about 2 years, following MPA2 ? the two programs are completely separate and MPA3 was written new from scratch.

In the time when we upgraded clients from MPA2 to MPA3 we made sure that ANY possible shaving mechanism would be removed and replaced with the opposite ? an anti shaving feature that would allow us for the most part to easily see if a client added code that could mess with the MPA3 code in any way shape or form.

Trax is right in what he is saying. This was a code that we had to add to remove any shaving that was in the mpa2. So when our old customers upgraded we were removing any module like this using this particular script with the inane name of ?no_shaving_update.sql? ? we have written upgrade scripts that were copying the table structure over to mpa3 database as they are. Should we have named is something else to avoid gfy threads like this?

StuardD ? you seem like a smart guy ? you are right on track and that is exactly what that file did. This file was used to remove anything associated with the old mpa2 shave feature. And the file is mostly in older MPA3 versions where this was a necessity to ensure that all upgrades or new installs were squeaky clean, which they all are. Newer versions will not have this file in it to begin with.

Anyone who understands a little SQL would see that this is what this code is doing, and I believe that having a no shaving was something everyone wanted, not the opposite.

Now, if there are still some conspiracy theorists out there that still want more info on this ? come into my office, let?s have you pick out any random MPA3 client and ask for their permission to review their source code with us. Anyone welcome of course.

[StuartD]

Originally Posted by Oystein

StuardD ? you seem like a smart guy ? you are right on track and that is exactly what that file did.

Shhh... you'll ruin my GFY reputation with such comments

[TheSenator]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Sonofsam, as you most likely know MPA3 has been out now for about 2 years, following MPA2 ? the two programs are completely separate and MPA3 was written new from scratch.

In the time when we upgraded clients from MPA2 to MPA3 we made sure that ANY possible shaving mechanism would be removed and replaced with the opposite ? an anti shaving feature that would allow us for the most part to easily see if a client added code that could mess with the MPA3 code in any way shape or form.

Trax is right in what he is saying. This was a code that we had to add to remove any shaving that was in the mpa2. So when our old customers upgraded we were removing any module like this using this particular script with the inane name of ?no_shaving_update.sql? ? we have written upgrade scripts that were copying the table structure over to mpa3 database as they are. Should we have named is something else to avoid gfy threads like this?

StuardD ? you seem like a smart guy ? you are right on track and that is exactly what that file did. This file was used to remove anything associated with the old mpa2 shave feature. And the file is mostly in older MPA3 versions where this was a necessity to ensure that all upgrades or new installs were squeaky clean, which they all are. Newer versions will not have this file in it to begin with.

Anyone who understands a little SQL would see that this is what this code is doing, and I believe that having a no shaving was something everyone wanted, not the opposite.

Now, if there are still some conspiracy theorists out there that still want more info on this ? come into my office, let?s have you pick out any random MPA3 client and ask for their permission to review their source code with us. Anyone welcome of course.

Are your customer allowed to add custom modules? Or is your code as is?

[rowan]

File is 404 now

[DamageX]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Sonofsam, as you most likely know MPA3 has been out now for about 2 years, following MPA2 ? the two programs are completely separate and MPA3 was written new from scratch.

In the time when we upgraded clients from MPA2 to MPA3 we made sure that ANY possible shaving mechanism would be removed and replaced with the opposite ? an anti shaving feature that would allow us for the most part to easily see if a client added code that could mess with the MPA3 code in any way shape or form.

Trax is right in what he is saying. This was a code that we had to add to remove any shaving that was in the mpa2. So when our old customers upgraded we were removing any module like this using this particular script with the inane name of ?no_shaving_update.sql? ? we have written upgrade scripts that were copying the table structure over to mpa3 database as they are. Should we have named is something else to avoid gfy threads like this?

StuardD ? you seem like a smart guy ? you are right on track and that is exactly what that file did. This file was used to remove anything associated with the old mpa2 shave feature. And the file is mostly in older MPA3 versions where this was a necessity to ensure that all upgrades or new installs were squeaky clean, which they all are. Newer versions will not have this file in it to begin with.

Anyone who understands a little SQL would see that this is what this code is doing, and I believe that having a no shaving was something everyone wanted, not the opposite.

Now, if there are still some conspiracy theorists out there that still want more info on this ? come into my office, let?s have you pick out any random MPA3 client and ask for their permission to review their source code with us. Anyone welcome of course.

So what you're basically saying is that your previous version of this software was helping NaughtyBank shave their affiliates, and now you're making sure to stop this malicious practice, which you created in the first place?

[Dirty F]

Originally Posted by rowan

File is 404 now

And thats wrong...Why remove it when theres nothing scary about it as just mentioned?

Fiddy...,.