Cross post from BG, but:So they banned me for explaining the incredibly simple problem that took them >6 months to fix. Note that I did not investigate this issue myself on a programming level in any way. I did not provide or create a crash dump from it. I did not create the plugin that fixes the fishing crash or in any way help with its creation. I did not even report the issue. I simply explained the problem in a way that people could understand.
Worth noting that they then banned me from the forums and cited intellectual property rights (knowing how their game works) rather than third party involvement (advocating people look for a third party fix).
Dancing Salvage Bans.
Dancing Salvage Bans.
No good deed goes unpunished.
[+]
that's not an exploit, it's a fix for a bug of theirs
Also, I posted it in September and got banned for it on the last day of February.
[+]
Lakshmi.Byrth said: »
Also, I posted it in September and got banned for it on the last day of February.
One less voice of reason on those boards. :/
[+]
Lakshmi.Byrth said: »
Also, I posted it in September and got banned for it on the last day of February.
Probably irked some coder that you found their bug by deduction and they ran around the office slamming doors until a mod agreed to give you a temp from the forums as retribution.
Anyone that has the ability to take my explanation and turn it into an exploit didn't need my explanation in the first place.
[+]
Verda said:
~
nothing he posted could even remotely be turned into an exploit, at best it's an extremely irrelevant description of a game mechanic..
A client side crash cannot be turned into an exploit.
It is not a useful stepping stone to any sort of fishing mod, save avoiding the mentioned crash.
It's information that should make their job easier, while exposing no vulnerabilities of any sort.
As usual, you have an amazing ability to write paragraphs about things you have no knowledge of..
It is not a useful stepping stone to any sort of fishing mod, save avoiding the mentioned crash.
It's information that should make their job easier, while exposing no vulnerabilities of any sort.
As usual, you have an amazing ability to write paragraphs about things you have no knowledge of..
There is absolutely no reason to go into memory and patch that function except to fix this bug.
There are multiple fishing bots that work purely off packets out there, and they use a stable API that is updated regularly after patches. Why the hell would someone use a memory patching program instead?
There are multiple fishing bots that work purely off packets out there, and they use a stable API that is updated regularly after patches. Why the hell would someone use a memory patching program instead?
Odin.Jassik said: »
Lakshmi.Byrth said: »
Also, I posted it in September and got banned for it on the last day of February.
Probably irked some coder that you found their bug by deduction and they ran around the office slamming doors until a mod agreed to give you a temp from the forums as retribution.
Its clearly way more dangerous to game someone who has knowledge about the code spreading info than leaving the exploit alone.
While helping with bugs is benefitial to playerbase, that kind of help has zero value to SE. They can just take their time to fix bugs, its not like having bug or not will drop subscriptions, most likely playerbase will just suck it if something is wrong and move on, while if someone keeps messing with their code, its more likely that person can build and spread tools to exploit the existing bug, that normally none would have access, aka salvage exploit, that just existed because of tools, that while an harmless exploit for someone playing legit, it became potentially destructive because of the third party programs.
Keeping people who knows a lot of this game code the furthest possible is understandable. For SE, the less people knows about this game problems, its better. It will give them time to fix things when they feels like.
[+]
Manipulating memory can be used to exploit things, sure, but it's most definitely not the best way almost universally.
I really wasn't, if you read what I wrote at all. I'm not even sure that's how the function worked, as I never looked at it myself and am asm illiterate. I was just trying to explain to people why they crashed about 2% of the time.
If someone did bother to patch that function for nefarious purposes, probably the most nefarious thing they could do would be to fix its return value so that you always have a constant amount of time to push one direction or the other. That would be a minor improvement at best compared to killfishing.
If someone did bother to patch that function for nefarious purposes, probably the most nefarious thing they could do would be to fix its return value so that you always have a constant amount of time to push one direction or the other. That would be a minor improvement at best compared to killfishing.
Patch whatever memory you want in the client, if there's no server side vulnerability it doesn't create an exploit. This particular memory isn't even useful to make the client easier to manipulate. The only benefit of adjusting it is to avoid crashing.
I'm Ashita's biggest plugin developer, and I work in native languages not Lua. I know my way around FFXI's memory. I also know that the bug Byrth mentioned is actually 2 rand%50s added together, making the effective chance 1/2500 instead of 1/50. Twist words as much as you want, your attempts to discredit me are based in feeling rather than fact.
I'm Ashita's biggest plugin developer, and I work in native languages not Lua. I know my way around FFXI's memory. I also know that the bug Byrth mentioned is actually 2 rand%50s added together, making the effective chance 1/2500 instead of 1/50. Twist words as much as you want, your attempts to discredit me are based in feeling rather than fact.
[+]
As far as litigation from SE, a quick google search tells me that I probably would be the first one.
[+]
Verda said: »
Fine shoot yourself in the foot for all I care. Just because SE hasn't done it before doesn't mean they won't follow the footsteps of the many companies that have. You play with fire enough you get burned friend. I strongly advise you to not publish that kind of stuff except among friends. And only then ones you have known a long time and might take a bullet for you. And that's all I'll say on the matter because you and most here don't seem to appreciate the warning. It's not for my benefit I speak out. If a ban for it from SE and a warning from someone in the coding industry for 14 years aren't a wake up call I don't know what would be.
You need to relax. He didn't do anything wrong.
its ok to be wrong
Like everything you've posted here..? Citing a BUG, not exploit, with innocuous details is laughable. There's no lawyer in the world that'd take a case based on the fact that their super secret rand() call was exposed.. never mind that using IP evidence to prosecute is extremely difficult to begin with and only considered in extreme offenses.
Byrth knows enough not to post a live exploit, and the fact you think otherwise shows either a deep arrogance or very little faith in him. You could have backed out once you realized the nature of the posted bug, but you're too stubborn to admit that you jumped the gun on your legal rant.
Byrth knows enough not to post a live exploit, and the fact you think otherwise shows either a deep arrogance or very little faith in him. You could have backed out once you realized the nature of the posted bug, but you're too stubborn to admit that you jumped the gun on your legal rant.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.