open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked CSM Meeting Minutes 14 December 2008
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

Author Topic

CCP Fallout

Posted - 2008.12.15 21:02:00 - [1]
 

Council of Stellar Management
Meeting Minutes
Sunday 14th December 2008
Present: Ankhesentepemkah, Bunyip, Darius JOHNSON, Extreme, Issler Dainze, LaVista Vista, Meissa Anunthiel, Omber Zombie, Pattern Clarc, Scagga Laebetrovo, Sophie Daigneau, Tusko Hopkins, Vuk Lau, CCP Arkanon, CCP Chronotis, CCP Diagoras, CCP Dr.EyjoG, CCP Fallout, CCP Wrangler, CCP Xhagen, Lead GM Grimmi

I. Announcements / Elections
None

II. Popular Issue
POS Exploit
1. Rumors on the Scrapheap Challenge forums claim that certain people had been using this exploit for 4 years. How long has this loophole been exploited?


EyjoG was able to confirm exploits starting in March 2008, with the bulk of it becoming operational in May/June 2008. CCP is in the process of restoring older data and will mine that data for further information over the next two weeks.

Meissa asked how far the current database extends. EyjoG responded that different data sets go back to different time periods, and as an example they know the exploit existed earlier than March, but they haven’t been able to find anyone using the exploit earlier than that yet. However they need to restore the older data so that they can mine it to see if people were using it earlier and stopped.

EyjoG would like to know if CSM thought it likely people were using this for a while and then stopped.

Pattern asked if this exploit corresponded to a new UI or another addition, and did the current data allow them to see that far.

Tusko asked if it was theoretically possible for some to be using this exploit for 4 years. Have CCP checked to see if the bug was inserted when POS’s were introduced?

Bunyip asked if the exploit was tied in with Alchemy in any way? EyjoG said no, that was simply a coincidence.

Diagoras confirmed the exploit as being possible (code wise) from at least February 2007, however they are still investigating further to see exactly when it became possible.

Issler is interested to find out if a petition was opened (as claimed) 4 years ago. EyjoG noted this would be discussed later in the meeting.

2. Why was this issue not detected sooner if the impact had "considerable and far reaching" consequences? After all, if items were generated out of nothing in sufficient quantities to have an effect on the economy, some alarm bells should have rung at some point. If this issue was not reported, how long might it have continued for?

EyjoG noted that the reason it wasn’t detected sooner was that the exploit wasn’t started on a grand scale until this year, so the effect on the economy came gradually. From a Quality Assurance’s perspective, they test for potential exploits regularly that are perceived as risks both on Tranquility and before they release new features or functionality, but in a universe as complex as EVE, it’s not possible to test for all potential exploits and in this particular situation they didn’t discover the issue earlier. Quality Assurance has been working for the last few days to reproduce and assist in solving the exploit.

Issler pointed out that this was a strange bug to have been introduced this recently since there weren’t any changes with POS reactions since the time span noted in the answers to the previous questions.

Diagoras explained that February 2007 was the earliest date they had that they are able to check the code for the exploit that hadn’t been changed in a way that would affect this, part of the investigation will be to confirm how long it has been possible to use this exploit.

Vuk noted that every big patch changes a lot of unrelated things, so the bug could have been introduced at any time.

Bunyip wanted to know how much Alchemy would make up for this exploit, will the values equalize or will Dysprosium-based prices increase. Issler noted that minerals used for alchemy are pretty rare.

CCP Fallout

Posted - 2008.12.15 21:06:00 - [2]
 

Tusko wanted to know if the exploit didn’t cause obvious anomalies in the data, how did CCP conclude it had considerable and far-reaching consequences? Was it an early guess?

Diagoras noted that watching the volume of materials produced vs. the normal possible supply of material into the game via moon mining helped establishing the consequences.

EyjoG re-iterated that to CCP it looks like the bug was available for a lot longer than it was used on a grand scale by players, but we should remember that this is still something they need to verify through data mining.

EyjoG also commented that in regard to the economic scale, when something enters into the system slowly, but then increases at a faster rate, it does not show up as an anomaly in the data, but they had two hints which they were investigating – the first being unusual price movements in regards to Morphite in July and the second was the price decline of Ferrogel in recent months.

Darius JOHNSON noted that CCP said that the activities wouldn’t be an anomaly in the data, however this exploit amounts to a dupe, resources were being introduced into the system that were never mined or created, that would then lead to a situation where potentially you have more of the resource being sold than is possible. Given that the situation was said to be far reaching, shouldn’t it have been something that was noticed specifically, and if it wasn’t an audit point, would it be in the future?

EyjoG agreed and explained that the problem was that these materials were used directly for production or traded outside of the market, so in order to see it, they would have to be looking for it specifically. They will be reviewing their audit processes to see if they can create automated audits that give them an indication of mismatch in resource allocation.

3. Adding to the above, are there any plans to add systems to detect future exploits like these?

EyjoG noted that they are reviewing the processes based on these both with regard to Quality Assurance and market monitoring and data mining.

4. How much contraband resources were produced through this exploit, and how big a share of the overall production is this?

EyjoG stated that the exact numbers weren’t known currently, but will be part of the entire investigation. Diagoras provided the rough estimates: Roughly 35% of the Ferrogel market. He noted that that is a very rough and an early figure that needs further analysis.

Meissa asked if they were only monitoring Ferrogel, or have there been use of this exploit for other reactions? Diagoras responded that the primary materials being produced were Dysporite, Fermionic Condensates, Ferrofluid, Ferrogel and Prometium. Ferrogel was by far the most exploited material.

Pattern asked if they could put that number into isk terms or into the likely increase or effect on the market that would now ensue after the bug’s correction. Diagoras stated that they can’t give isk numbers currently as it required further data mining.

LaVista wondered if it is even something CCP can talk about, as even if they could answer it, it would be a bannable offense. For example “prices will go up x%” and person Y goes out and buys up stock. EyjoG noted that CCP have already said that they expect this to impact the market, and data in Jita shows the impact already. However, they plan to let the market settle a little more before they give out estimates as there is a lot of speculation occurring currently and the market needs to settle.

5. In the light of the above, what is the scope of the impact this exploit had on the economy, and what will happen to the economy now that the loophole has been closed?


CCP Fallout

Posted - 2008.12.15 21:09:00 - [3]
 

EyjoG split this into two parts: The impact on the economy is significant; overall they are expecting this generated a few trillion isk. As a comparison, the daily trade on average in EVE through the market for all items is 3 trillion isk. So it’s significant, but not catastrophic.

Part 2: Due to the size of the EVE economy, EyjoG is expecting the market to recover quite quickly, the introduction of Alchemy will also help in that regard. However the most critical materials they are monitoring closely and will take further action if needed so that there will be no absolute shortage of the material in question.

Issler asked if these expectations are assuming that the dates currently thought to be the first major use of the exploit? EyjoG answered yes.

Bunyip wanted to know what kind of impact the exploit has had on the ETC market, and whether the effects will ever be fully recognized? EyjoG answered that it wasn’t known yet.

6. What impact did the ISK and resources made through this exploit have on the outcomes of 0.0 warfare?

EyjoG said that it wasn’t known at this point and most likely will not be possible to estimate.

7. If there is serious shortage on certain materials now that the exploit has been fixed, are there plans to make them (slightly) more common?

EyjoG answered that no, the only plan for now is to monitor the situation and make sure there will not be a shortage of goods. Shortage = absolute shortage, i.e. product not available.

Meissa asked how they planned to go about that? There would be less of the high-end moon product, will CCP act as purveyors of those goods? EyjoG replied that if there was an absolute shortage, then CCP would use NPC market orders, but he would like to emphasize that they are not expecting that they will need to do that.

8. CCP decided not to make public the names of the corporations and individuals that were involved in this exploit. This lead to wild speculation and accusations, but after a day the people found out who most of the people involved are anyway. Would it have been a better idea to make the names public from the start?

CCP respects our players’ privacy and therefore the policy has always been that CCP does not release information about a player or a player’s account to third parties. In this case, CCP think it’s in the best interest of all players that we uphold this policy in order to avoid setting a precedent that could cause issues later.


Arkanon stated that CCP’s policy in regards to this has been consistent from launch; they are sticking with that policy. Changing a policy on a whim is seldom a good idea.

LaVista asked if CCP could provide an updated number – was it still 70 accounts, 3 corps and 2 alliances? Grimmi replied that they are the rough numbers of bans issued, but investigations are still underway.

Darius asked if CCP had considered the feasibility of making more public announcements of bannings for things such as exploits and RMT – the way World of Warcraft handles it as an educational deterrent. He assumed bannings occur, but it’s rare that an announcement or news item of any type is made. Arkanon stated that they do announce bannings and actions taken when it’s of a noticeable scale, but naming names is a breach of CCP policy on player privacy. Reporting on day to day activities of the Game Master team is not something CCP feels would be very effective as the bans are not newsworthy most of the time.

Vuk agreed that exploiting of this scale should be publicly announced, especially when there are rumors about all major alliances being involved and previous history of trolling, not to mention that it possibly affected alliance warfare.


CCP Fallout

Posted - 2008.12.15 21:13:00 - [4]
 

Darius wanted to note that he was in no way insinuating that names should be named, but rather that if regular updates would be given regarding numbers of bans it could be effective as well. Possibly a monthly report of some type exploring the avenues that better communication from the customer support team regarding things like actions taken, response times, tickets opened, etc. would create. Pattern agreed. Arkanon thanked Darius for the suggestion and while he wouldn’t speak on behalf of the Game Masters, he can say that their approach is deliberate. Whether it is the correct approach is debatable.

Issler stated that he didn’t understand how naming a character that was banned has anything to do with privacy, as there is no published link between a character and the RL person affected. Arkanon restated that they draw the line at naming names. EyjoG pointed out the current CCP policy is clear, but the CSM could file this as an issue to discuss in the Iceland meeting.

9. What guarantees do we have that everyone involved has action undertaken against his/her account? Did CCP track down the people that did not directly own one of the offending POSes, but was involved in the process regardless? What about the people that had set up POSes to exploit this issue in the past, but removed them or lost them through combat before CCP discovered the exploit? On the other hand, what guarantees do we have that there were no innocent people punished?

EyjoG stated that CCP is currently working on this issue, defining who is and is not guilty is quite tricky. That is if someone received a battleship, paid for with isk gained from an exploit, from his corporation to participate in a fleet battle, is that person guilty of an exploit? His question to the CSM is, how far should CCP go? Is it possible to use fines instead of bans for those enjoying the benefits without being directly guilty?

LaVista noted that guilty by association is wrong, the people that ran the operation should be banned. Things like titans that were funded by indirect isk should not be banned and from the Game Master’s point of view it would be hard as at some point everyone would be guilty.

Issler noted that if he had a battleship funded by this it should be removed, and it would make people think about the people they choose to associate with.

Grimmi pointed out that as in any investigation, they need to establish with beyond a reasonable doubt that someone was directly involved in the exploit or knowingly gained from it in order to take punitive action against them. Merely being in a corporation or alliance does not necessarily get people in trouble. Scagga agreed with Grimmi.

Vuk thought that it shouldn’t go too far when it comes to banning, as there would be more cons than pros, as shown with the T20 incident. Members shouldn’t be considered guilty if they weren’t aware of the exploit, banning and fining should be limited only to the people directly involved in the exploit.

EyjoG noted that fines have not been used in EVE before, they have seized illegal isk but putting an actual fine on an offense would be something new – what did the CSM think of that? Vuk stated fines are pointless. Issler is happy when resources or value of resources are removed from wherever it ended up in cases of no direct involvement. Scagga is opposed to fines as they are meaningless and seizing illegal isk/assets is a good limit. Vuk questioned CCP’s double standards when it comes to banning previously. Arkanon asked Vuk to elaborate. Vuk stated that there were cases of people being banned on circumstantial evidence when dealing with RMT. Arkanon responded by stating that anyone who felt they were wrongly banned can petition to argue the case.

CCP Fallout

Posted - 2008.12.15 21:16:00 - [5]
 

Xhagen reminded everyone to stay on topic – bans in general are not up for discussion, this is a discussion regarding the exploit committed. Vuk stated that everyone knew that the petition system is far from perfect, and in many cases the answers from low level Game Masters are not to the player’s liking.

10. Is it true that this issue has been reported through the petition system and through email three years ago? There are forum posts from that date that indicate problems with the starbase reactions, and the people that reported them claim their petitions and emails were not answered.

EyjoG stated that they were still trying to verify this. The petition system has changed and CCP had customer support outsourced at the time. It will take time to look through old databases.

Scagga wanted to know if it was possible for Customer Support to delete petitions from the system; essentially cover their tracks. Xhagen noted that as a former Senior Game Master, the answer is no. Once a petition was filed, it could not be deleted by a Game Master of any level. Scagga asked about emails that may have been sent about this issue. Xhagen answered that the Game Masters had an outsourced email system prior to 2005, and that it will take a while to dig through, but the same applied to emails, once a ticket was created it could not be deleted. Post 2005 all petitions are available.

Issler asked if he ran into a similar situation in the future, petitioned it, got a generic response that no issue was identified, could he then safely do whatever it was he found?

EyjoG responded to that with a firm no, you should know the TOS and EULA and any breach of it means that actions would be taken against the offending account when the issue was discovered.

Darius pointed out that it would be stupid to continue to cheat simply because your petition wasn’t answered. Issler responded that it meant that he would have to decide on his own whether something was a defect or an exploit. EyjoG stated that in short, a petition shouldn’t be handled this way in the future, so if people find themselves in this situation and not being answered, re-file the petition, if not answered then, contact Internal Affairs.

11. CCP say they are improving the petition system to deal with petitions that report exploits faster. Could we get any more details on how they plan to do this? And what guarantee do we have that exploit and bug reports do not get a standard Game Master reply and closed?

EyjoG stated that generally speaking, petitions filed in the exploits category are immediately assigned high priority and get attended to within the day. Sometimes however (like in this case when the petition was not filed as an exploit) petitions are filed wrongly - risking a delay in response. CCP have already set up new work procedures that will discover wrongly filed petitions earlier, but the exact details are still being finalized. Another option discussed was to create a tool similar to the fleet fight notification system.

Vuk wanted to add quickly that the current petition system was not good, mostly due to the incompetence of the low level Game Masters and nothing is solved until escalated to senior Game Masters. Vuk also thinks that CCP’s multiple petition filing system is wrong. EyjoG thinks this should be something added to the CSM meeting in Iceland in January.

Grimmi expanded on EyjoG’s statement in that CCP are working on inventing means of detecting and re-categorizing misfiled petitions in order to make sure this type of thing doesn’t go unnoticed. No specific details at this point however.

CCP Fallout

Posted - 2008.12.15 21:17:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: CCP Fallout on 16/12/2008 09:17:49
12. Were any CCP employees (Game Masters, QA or otherwise) involved in this the abuse of exploit in any way, either directly or indirectly (by keeping it quiet or by informing players, for example)?

Arkanon answered no, there is no indication that a CCP employee was involved in this at all, but investigations are continuing as more data emerges.

Scagga noted that he had been informed and read from various sources that people came across odd anomalies or said that they knew of instances where Game Masters were rumored to be involved; where would the investigation draw the line between following a wild goose chase and following a lead.

Arkanon replied that people should feel free to email them with any ideas or leads they may have (internalaffairs@ccpgames.com), Internal Affairs will examine all claims.

EyjoG wanted to reassure everyone that CCP are leaving no stone unturned and that Internal Affairs agents are very quick to spot if certain leads look like they might lead to someting or are simply wild goose chases. So if people think they have a lead, please let Internal Affairs know.

Meeting End.
Minutes compiled by Omber Zombie. Any errors or omissions please contact him (oz@omberzombie.com)



Update: The meeting minutes are now downloadable. You can obtain your copy here.

Treelox
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:24:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Treelox on 15/12/2008 21:39:24
thank you CCP Fallout for getting this out to us, as quick as you could.


A question to any of those at CCP who read this. Will there be a further report from CCP to the general player base, in a few weeks when ALL of the databases have been datamined to see how far back and to what extent the exploit penetrated our game?



--edit

added my question

Monkey Rat
Silver Snake Enterprise
Skunk-Works
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:46:00 - [8]
 

Nothing new then.

Kaijusan
Gallente
Austro-Hungarian Empire
Elysium Alliance
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:48:00 - [9]
 

Total and absolute whitewash.


Fractal Eye
Gallente
Inter-Galactic Research Of Knowledge
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:52:00 - [10]
 

I agree with the above poster. All this time we waited for the minutes, and, now that we have them, no new info garnered imo. I've only been playing EVE for about a year now, and have 3 accounts (which i pay for with RL money). However, given this lackluster response by CCP and the *almost* worthless minutes, I may just let my accounts stop after their time is up. (And, yes, you can have my stuff.. I'll leave it at the EVE gate for you)

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:53:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Treelox
Will there be a further report from CCP to the general player base, in a few weeks when ALL of the databases have been datamined to see how far back and to what extent the exploit penetrated our game?



This.
It's nice that you gathered so quickly, and answered some questions. Although unsatisfactory to me, i'd like to know if we get to know the final result of your datamining.
I'd like to see some multi page devblog coverage, or even one whole qen dealing with it.

Issler Dainze
Minmatar
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:54:00 - [12]
 

Please note that Issler is she!

Issler

Afale II
Space Pony Farm
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:55:00 - [13]
 

Quote:
LaVista noted that guilty by association is wrong, the people that ran the operation should be banned. Things like titans that were funded by indirect isk should not be banned


aha Laughing

Treelox
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:55:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Fractal Eye
I agree with the above poster. All this time we waited for the minutes, and, now that we have them, no new info garnered imo.



Actually there is plenty of new information in the OP. Instead of rumors we now have facts that are confirmed by CCP.

Also as they say, they are going to datamine all the way back to the begining of POS in eve, that is a metric fukton of data to go through, so I expect them to get back to us with some more in a couple weeks.


What kind of information did you want, "Name and Shame"?

Disteeler
Perkone
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:57:00 - [15]
 

Thanks. Seems we'll have to wait.

Karille
Gallente
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Posted - 2008.12.15 21:58:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Treelox

What kind of information did you want, "Name and Shame"?


I believe they desperately wanted to be correct in their 4 year old exploit doomsaying.

Arithron
Gallente
Gallente Trade Alliance
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:02:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Arithron on 15/12/2008 22:08:02
Originally by: CCP Fallout


EyjoG the first being unusual price movements in regards to Morphite in July




Err, does this mean activity like buying all Jita stock at 9k, relisting at 15k....awaiting price to drop to 10k and then rebuying up market and relisting at 14k a unit? I think it was July that I did this...I'm assuming that unusual price movements were more than just the rippling effect that such a price hike had (most regions went up to the 15k mark within 2 days).

edit: I'd also like to fess up to taking Dysprosium from 20k a unit to 100k a unit, in two distinct steps. Firstly, from 20k to 55k, then from 28k to 100k (where it has bounced between 170-98k ever since). Nothing uptoward at all in my activities, just seeing how far a market could be pushed Laughing

take care,
Arithron

Fractal Eye
Gallente
Inter-Galactic Research Of Knowledge
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:02:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Treelox
Originally by: Fractal Eye
I agree with the above poster. All this time we waited for the minutes, and, now that we have them, no new info garnered imo.



Actually there is plenty of new information in the OP. Instead of rumors we now have facts that are confirmed by CCP.

Also as they say, they are going to datamine all the way back to the begining of POS in eve, that is a metric fukton of data to go through, so I expect them to get back to us with some more in a couple weeks.


What kind of information did you want, "Name and Shame"?


No, that's not what I'm upset about. Given that this exploit was discovered on December 7th, and it's the 15th now, I'd expect more info than 'we're datamining it atm'. I personally don't work in computers or programming in anyway, so I don't personally know what work would involve. (Let the flames come.) All I know is, after waiting a week, the amount of information from CCP is lacking.

Farmer Kamikaze
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:04:00 - [19]
 

Thank you CCP for a measured response and the full disclosure of information found to date. The mining of this much data is going to take time away from other projects, but I think that the outcome will be to the benefit of the EVE community. Some of the more hysterical reactions have been answered already.

I would like to note that I strongly disagree with the privacy policy as you have stated it. EVE is meant to be about consequences, and by withholding names in this case, you prevent the players from taking matters into their own hands, something that is fundamental to the EVE identity. I would ask the CSM to raise this issue at the next meeting. As stated in the meeting, the RL identities are not published, but the history of the characters involved would be an important point in future hirings. And not necessarily negatively. Some corps seem to take a perverse pleasure in collecting idiots, and may claim a badge of honour to have an exploiter in their ranks. Let us know about it however.

Resetgun
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:04:00 - [20]
 

Thank you from your answers.

Hopefully you will able to mine data, see how deep rabbit hole goes and clear air.

Still lot's of uncertainity how big economical effect was. But I guess we will see it in couple months anyway.

Baske
THE PAROXYSM
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:06:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Kaijusan
Total and absolute whitewash.




Signed !

Baske
THE PAROXYSM
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:07:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Farmer Kamikaze
Thank you CCP for a measured response and the full disclosure of information found to date. The mining of this much data is going to take time away from other projects, but I think that the outcome will be to the benefit of the EVE community. Some of the more hysterical reactions have been answered already.

I would like to note that I strongly disagree with the privacy policy as you have stated it. EVE is meant to be about consequences, and by withholding names in this case, you prevent the players from taking matters into their own hands, something that is fundamental to the EVE identity. I would ask the CSM to raise this issue at the next meeting. As stated in the meeting, the RL identities are not published, but the history of the characters involved would be an important point in future hirings. And not necessarily negatively. Some corps seem to take a perverse pleasure in collecting idiots, and may claim a badge of honour to have an exploiter in their ranks. Let us know about it however.


Full disclosure???

Proof or stfu :p

Karille
Gallente
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:08:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Baske


Full disclosure???

Proof or stfu :p

Proof there wasn't?

Einstein's Ghost
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:10:00 - [24]
 

Quote:
Roughly 35% of the Ferrogel market


Shocked

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:11:00 - [25]
 

So naming characters is absolutely against the policy.

Can someone explain why we have such a policy in the first place? Why do some CCP people have strong feelings that this is the way it should be?

I would understand if there was a question of real account information: such as the account name, account passport, credit card numbers, real person names. All that should be rightfully private. But a character name in game?

I just don't see the reason.

Del Girl
Resilience.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:11:00 - [26]
 

CCP would make excellent Politians :)

Treelox
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:12:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Treelox on 15/12/2008 22:13:07
Originally by: Karille
Originally by: Treelox

What kind of information did you want, "Name and Shame"?


I believe they desperately wanted to be correct in their 4 year old exploit doomsaying.


...and they still might be, we just have to wait on the data mining. I would guess that a 10s of, if not 100s of terabytes to go through to check ALL the db's.


-edit

i fail grammer...often

Farmer Kamikaze
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:13:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Baske


Full disclosure???

Proof or stfu :p


You choose to quote two words. The sentence reads "full disclosure of information found to date."

The economist is quite forthcoming in his answers and clearly states where his data is not adequate/mined sufficienly. The proof is in the transcripts so I am disinclined to stfu. Unless the CSM has edited the transcripts, kidnapped the guilty GMs and shot the developers to hide their evil secret?

/me pats thinfoil hat in place

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:14:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Gnulpie on 15/12/2008 22:32:12
To compile the meagre facts:

  • The exploit was at least possible since Feb 2007, investigation continues to pinpoint the exact date.

  • The data analysis so far shows that the usage of the exploit began in March 2008 - but old data is not investigated yet.

  • The data analysis shows that from May/June 2008 to Dec 2008 the exploit was massively used - but old data is not investigated yet.

  • Ferrogel, Fermionic Condensates, Ferrofluid, Dysporite and Prometium were mainly produced using this exploit. (I wonder why hypersynaptic fibers are not mentioned since the market there was also highly irregular!)

  • Roughly 1/3 of the ferrogel market was fraud and due to the exploit. Numbers for the other markets are not available yet.

  • Alchemy material markets will be watched and only if absolutely necessary action will be taken by CCP to balance these markets.

  • No data about old petitions (pre 2005) are available yet. (But since the exploit is possible only from Feb 2007 and afterwards, it could have been petitoned earlier anway, right?)

  • No names of banned players will be released.

  • Only players directly involved into the exploit will be banned.

  • No game master or other employee of CCP was involved in cheating using this exploit.

  • The investigation will be continued and further results announced in around 2 weeks.



So far so good. But it is still unclear to me when the exploit was first possible (they said Feb 2007, but it was used March 2008 first?) and if maybe some other code allowed a similar exploit earlier?

Also: What are the tools to find these exploits? I hope CCP does not rely onto market analysis but that they can check pos configuations directly in their database.

Maybe it is worth to write a tool which checks the pos configurations? This is an important matter and deserves this sort of manpower investment.

Thynar
Gallente
Melita Foundation
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:17:00 - [30]
 

"Diagoras confirmed the exploit as being possible (code wise) from at least February 2007, however they are still investigating further to see exactly when it became possible."

This seems to imply that the exploit could maybe have been possible before Feb 2007.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only