open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: POS Exploit
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]

Author Topic

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2009.02.12 15:21:00 - [211]
 

Some facts about ferrofluid and dysporite - both materials directly involved in making ferrogel and fermionic condensates. Both materials are intermediate materials and made directly from moon materials.

Conventional production of ferrofluid
dysprosium + hafnium
costs: 82.000 isk/unit

Alchemy production of ferrofluid
cadmium + hafnium
costs: 63.000 isk/unit

Conventional production of dysporite
dysprosium + mercury
costs: 84.000 isk/unit

Alchemy production of dysporite
cadmium + mercury
costs: 64.500 isk/unit

In above numbers the pos fuel costs are already included.

Alchemy produces the intermediate materials in much smaller quantities, that means that you need a lot more (20 times more) reactors to produce the materials with alchemy than with conventional means.

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2009.02.12 15:26:00 - [212]
 

I noticed for weeks on now that fermionic condensates are sold in Jita for much cheaper prices than building costs.

At current prices the fermionic condensates production with a pos causes at least 500k isk loss per hour.

Can CCP please investigate this? This is not a normal market fluktuation because, something strange is going on there. I said the same about ferrogel before the pos exploit was revealed.

Could it be that something is still not working as intended, that still some exploit is possible? Or could it be that there is still some large cache of illegal material available which is now sold?

Ferrogel seems to be fine. Only the condensates are strange.

Renfrew Shrufan
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2009.02.12 15:45:00 - [213]
 

Originally by: Gnulpie
I noticed for weeks on now that fermionic condensates are sold in Jita for much cheaper prices than building costs.

At current prices the fermionic condensates production with a pos causes at least 500k isk loss per hour.

Can CCP please investigate this? This is not a normal market fluktuation because, something strange is going on there. I said the same about ferrogel before the pos exploit was revealed.

Could it be that something is still not working as intended, that still some exploit is possible? Or could it be that there is still some large cache of illegal material available which is now sold?

Ferrogel seems to be fine. Only the condensates are strange.


Yeah - as nothing gets sold for less than what it's worth.

I think I've got at least a couple of dozen researched BPO's that if I built the items from mineral cost - I'd be losing ISK.

What's your point?

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2009.02.12 15:52:00 - [214]
 

Originally by: Renfrew Shrufan
I think I've got at least a couple of dozen researched BPO's that if I built the items from mineral cost - I'd be losing ISK.

What's your point?


And, are you building from it? No...

Believe me, those guys who manage the pos and moon reactions certainly KNOW what they are doing and they do not sell with loss.

It can happen that you sell with a loss sometimes because a sudden price spike, yes. But not for weeks on. There is something going on.

WTF is wrong with poining CCP towards it so that they can have a closer look??? If they look and say, all okay, then fine. But they better have again a closer look.

Renfrew Shrufan
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2009.02.12 16:16:00 - [215]
 

Originally by: Gnulpie
Originally by: Renfrew Shrufan
I think I've got at least a couple of dozen researched BPO's that if I built the items from mineral cost - I'd be losing ISK.

What's your point?


And, are you building from it? No...

Believe me, those guys who manage the pos and moon reactions certainly KNOW what they are doing and they do not sell with loss.

It can happen that you sell with a loss sometimes because a sudden price spike, yes. But not for weeks on. There is something going on.

WTF is wrong with poining CCP towards it so that they can have a closer look??? If they look and say, all okay, then fine. But they better have again a closer look.


I'm sure they do know what's going on. I'd build from it too if I didn't feel that my time doesn't matter - which, unfortunately, many people seem to feel as if that's the case. Selling for under actual costs is rampant within Eve.

I'm okay with someone having a look, but it's just not that uncommon in Eve really. I'd think it's just someone needing fast ISK for something, and it happens all the time. Yes, even for weeks on end on major items that cost multiple 10's of millions or much more.

You've also never specified any real volume and or costing details, which makes me wonder at your sincerity, as it should be easily available if you were all that concerned. As I'm at work, I can only reach a very few websites and not the game, so I can't check it out myself - even if I'd care to visit Jita.

Anyway, my basic point was that selling at what some would consider a loss is a very valid and widely used tactic here at times. After all, some ISK is better than none, it all depends on actual and perceived buy and sell prices only, and it can actually yield better overall profits in some cases. *shrugs*

My only problem with demanding that CCP investigate every item sold at a loss is that they'd never have anything else to do.

Valeria Crossroads
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:10:00 - [216]
 

Edited by: Valeria Crossroads on 13/02/2009 00:55:04
Quote:
I don't act just because there's an ULA stating what's right or wrong but also because of my own.
If I see someone making insane cheated ISK I feel it'll impact me negatively sooner or later and so I report them even if the ULA does not strictly push me to do that.



If you agree with me that its a choice and not a must then why not say: yeah, you are right?

Quote:
The ULA might not state every possibility (impossible) but the statement:

Dude in your corp exploits => "Somehow" YOU director earn trillions => YOU are responsible is very simple to make.
We are not talking of some rogue faceless employee hiddenly photocopying his buttcheecks on the photocopier but of directors who became billionaire and not out of thin air.

Can't state: "how did CCP's economist not see the huge money flow" like several did in this thread, when you director don't want to see the huge money flow coming out your very corporation.



And in my example on how my corps works i just showed you that there are organization models where a director does not see all money streams, so an automatic ban is unfair.

Quote:

TBH no one cares if you hate rules. I hate CONCORD killing me if I shoot at a guy in 1.0 sec (I even joined FW to have more choices) but that's the game we got.
If tomorrow CCP puts black on white about director = fully responsible, there you go with your freedom, it's their product not yours.



The question is: does a director always know about all money streams? I showed you in my example you can cannot say for 100% sure. So an automatic ban is unfair. You cannot convict if there is reasonable doubt.

Quote:

If you can write such an elaborate statement, you can also understand they checked the transactions logs and banned the directors, they just happen to be very very easily involved in this sort of things.



And again you assume stuff. They did not wrote: we checked the logs and where the directors were proofed involved: they were banned. No they wrote: if director: is involved -> thus banned. You can try to ignore time after time again what they wrote they did and make some possible story up. But its nothing more or less than what they wrote. Not some fantasy story of your imagination.

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2009.02.13 09:10:00 - [217]
 

Originally by: Renfrew Shrufan
My only problem with demanding that CCP investigate every item sold at a loss is that they'd never have anything else to do.


Of course I am not demanding anything. I just suggest that they have a look there because it still looks unregular for weeks now.

If they take suggestions or not is up to them, not my business.

Renfrew Shrufan
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2009.02.13 14:52:00 - [218]
 

Originally by: Gnulpie
Originally by: Renfrew Shrufan
My only problem with demanding that CCP investigate every item sold at a loss is that they'd never have anything else to do.


Of course I am not demanding anything. I just suggest that they have a look there because it still looks unregular for weeks now.

If they take suggestions or not is up to them, not my business.


Sounds good, sorry to have been so... opinionated yesterday - way too cranky then for some reason fwiw.

SkyMeetFire
Amarr
Posted - 2009.02.13 16:29:00 - [219]
 

Quote:
The opening action on our part regarding the exploit included the total destruction of all the POS complexes involved. This entailed flying to each one and basically nuking everything in sight - a fireworks show of epic proportions but with no witnesses except the GMs in the demolition team.


Please tell me someone had the foresight to record this using FRAPS or something of the like. I'm assuming something of that magnitude rarely happens, might be something interesting to have around...

For some reason as soon as I read that line, I just imagined a video of dozens of POSs being blown up set to the 1812 Overture. I know, cliche, but I doubt anyone can deny that it would be gloriously entertaining to see dupers get their just rewards...Twisted Evil

Cedric Diggory
Perfunctory Oleaginous Laocoon Mugwumps
Posted - 2009.02.13 18:11:00 - [220]
 

Quote:
Just how much money >IRL< has changed hands scence all this money ISK has been made, and where did it go,....


tl;dr - these people could have made between $113,736 and $253,736 over a two year period.

---

For comparison, a 60 day gamecard costs around US$35 and sells for around 700,000,000 ISK.
The first link I found on google offers 1,500,000,000 for around US$35.
At least 6,000,000,000,000 ISK and at most 12,000,000,000,000 ISK was created using this exploit.
134 accounts were found to be implicit in the scam since 2007

For the sake of simplicity, we'll calculate assuming that these figures have been static, that all these accounts were being "paid" for using time cards & that every single ISK remaining went into RMT:

134 accounts @ 350,000,000 ISK/Month for 24 months = 1,125,600,000,000 ISK
6,000,000,000,000 - 1,125,600,000,000 = 4,874,400,000,000
12,000,000,000,000 - 1,125,600,000,000 = 10,874,400,000,000
( 4,874,400,000,000 / 1,500,000,000 ) * 35 = 113,736
( 10,874,400,000,000 / 1,500,000,000 ) * 35 = 253,736


If then we assume that this entire system was intended for RMT, potential these people made between $113,736 and $253,736 over a two year period. That's not a bad wage really, for running a few POS chains... Laughing

Of course these figures are worst case scenario. Even if all of these accounts were involved in RMT over this period, the actual amount of money would be lower, but probably still just into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Personally I doubt that many were involved in RMT, but I was intruiged enough to do the math, so here it is!

Droog 1
Posted - 2009.02.15 11:44:00 - [221]
 

I am not surpriised that CCP didn't fix this bug when it was first reported. After all these are the same people that thought ghost training was a bug.

CCP fail again.

Cadela Fria
Amarr
x13
Raiden.
Posted - 2009.02.15 17:58:00 - [222]
 

Originally by: URUS FORGE
Edited by: URUS FORGE on 11/02/2009 22:52:45
Now that this t2 mat has been fixed.. are you now implementing a new bug to exploit t3 prior to its release..

Would Dr double eye patch ..chief economist for bernie madoff.. care to explain how this new t3 exploit won't impact the eve economy using graphs from one system and less than 10% of those involved in the exploit prior to the news of t3 mat exploits getting out in 1 year from today?

You could save us all a lot of time, and maybe we might really believe the next one was an oversight too Laughing


You never cease to make me laugh..you spent so much time with tinfoil hattery, saying CCP would never respond, keep their promises or come through with an explanation, or own up to their guilty guilty selves about what *REALLY* happened, and how you're a business man yourself of such proportions that at best you're the owner of Sony, or Microsoft..Then CCP comes around and gives you EXACTLY what you were afraid of, a thorough answer and indepth analysis, which ultimately has left you looking like a complete moron.LaughingCool

And all you can do now..is make a snide, butthurt, feeling-like-an-idiot, unintelligent troll remark about how they will purposely implement an exploit for T3. Rolling EyesLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing

You're a real piece of work. LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing
Oh I'm sorry, I know you will try to defend yourself and save face.."damage control" right? Sure go ahead with that, it's all you have left. By the way I think x-files is on, don't miss your regular dose of inspiration of how it REALLY all works.Rolling EyesLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing

Steve Thomas
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.02.16 06:58:00 - [223]
 

Originally by: Renfrew Shrufan
Originally by: Gnulpie
Originally by: Renfrew Shrufan




WTF is wrong with poining CCP towards it so that they can have a closer look??? If they look and say, all okay, then fine. But they better have again a closer look.



My only problem with demanding that CCP investigate every item sold at a loss is that they'd never have anything else to do.
yah

Lets face if it they did that then they would be double checking *all* of my buy orders and I dont do the .01 isk region wide orders. (I set mine ~.1 to .01 the lowest current sell order, they often get filled that day or the next even when minerals are spikeing up)

Guterro d'Tefiane
Einherjar Rising
Cry Havoc.
Posted - 2009.02.16 11:28:00 - [224]
 

That was a very nice report. A lot of damage was done to this game when news of the exploit first came out. I'm glad to see CCP take such serious measures. Well done.

URUS FORGE
Caldari
THE TRUST INCORPORATED
Posted - 2009.02.17 14:29:00 - [225]
 

If they took it serious.. it wouldnt have happend for as much as 4yrs.

Che Biko
Humanitarian Communists
Posted - 2009.02.17 22:45:00 - [226]
 

Quote:
Direct involvement meant that the character had a director role in the corporation using the exploit or was directly involved in servicing the POSes in exploited state. Others that were found to be involved in moving the exploited goods and laundering the ISK also received bans for their part.

I am wondering how sure CCP is about some people being involved were knowingly breaking the EULA.
Was it considered they could be scapegoats or something? I could see myself moving stuff from silo's without knowing how my corp got them.

If there was some doubt about whether they knew what they were doing, would they receive bans for more than a month? Or would punishment be restricted to removal of assets/ISK? Because if there was doubt, I'd prefer the latter.

Tari Redhel
Caldari
Posted - 2009.02.18 13:32:00 - [227]
 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way CCP used to detect the cheaters only detected those who were actively cheating in December 2008: Checking which reactors were currently running in buggy mode, and then estimating how much conterfeit they had produced based on when they were anchored/onlined(?).

However this would not detect cheaters who switched over to running their reactors in a non-bugged mode at any time before December 2008.

It might seem that any cheaters who had gotten away with it for months would be unlikely to suddenly stop and go legit for no reason. But there actually are several plausible reasons.
It might be that every six months or so they shut down their cheating corp and start up cheating in a new corp (with new characters), so as to safe-harbour their previous profits.
Or they might have stopped because they noticed that knowledge of the exploit started to become so widespread that they felt it was just a matter of time before CCP would hear about it.
Or they might have received inside information. It wouldn't even have had to be information about that the reactor exploit had been reported. Even just the fact that an exploit had been reported would have been enough for them to shut down and camouflage by switching their reactors to legitimate reactions.

So since the evidence about how long the exploit has been exploited is inconclusive, might there be some other way of seeing if it started earlier? One way would be to see if there are any unexplained changes in price/volume of any of the goods in the period before the exploitation of the exploit is supposed to have started.
The graphs linked in the article is certainly suggestive. There is a big jump in trade volume of Fermionic Condensates in November 2007, while the large scale exploiting doesn't take off until February 2008. And looking at the Ferrogel it is possible that it started as early as July 2006 (!), when it dropped below the 10k ISK line, a level it would not reach again until Fall 2007.

This isn't proof of course. But I think it shows that it is possible that the cheaters that were caught weren't all those who had used this exploit, or even a majority of them, but merely the last wave.

I would therefore suggest that CCP, if it is possible, use backups to check the status of all reactors
1) 2 weeks before the Bug was reported.
2) Every 3-6 months before that.
If any bugged reactions are discovered in reactors that in December 2008 were offlined/unanchored/switched to non-bugged, a more fine-meshed search would be called for.

Susung
Hydra Resources
D-Collective
Posted - 2009.02.19 01:52:00 - [228]
 

Thank you, for a straight forward blog this is what I expect and rarely ever get from anywhere these days. 2 comments
1. dont reissue the T2 BPO's the less of them that exist the better.
2. With the expanding player base the Cap on high end materials quantities are gonna cause inflation. A large portion of the market is now supplied by the Inventors not the T2 Bpo holders. We do not have an easy profit margin to work within. Every increase in materials cost broadens the gulf between the Bpo holders and the inventors bottom line price.

Shouldn't the cost of a product, in particular a product that has been in production for several years, be delegated by the resources required to produce that product. Not who was lucky enough to have won a lottery 4 years ago.

Susung

Gemberkoekje
Gallente
Foundation
Posted - 2009.02.19 09:14:00 - [229]
 

Originally by: Tari Redhel
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way CCP used to detect the cheaters only detected those who were actively cheating in December 2008: Checking which reactors were currently running in buggy mode, and then estimating how much conterfeit they had produced based on when they were anchored/onlined(?).



You are wrong. Read the blog again.

Tari Redhel
Caldari
Posted - 2009.02.20 13:38:00 - [230]
 

Originally by: Gemberkoekje
Originally by: Tari Redhel
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way CCP used to detect the cheaters only detected those who were actively cheating in December 2008: Checking which reactors were currently running in buggy mode, and then estimating how much conterfeit they had produced based on when they were anchored/onlined(?).



You are wrong. Read the blog again.


Yes, its quite possible I'm wrong. It can be that they only detected current cheating, or it can be that they detected past cheating too. From the blog it isn't possible to tell which:

Quote:
All information on the production states and links of running POSes was available in the database. After developing a fix, we slapped together a query that ran through all the POS Reactors on TQ, checking which ones had links pointing to them, and checking their production states. Any online reactor that had no links pointing to it, and yet was still reporting itself as having produced output last turn, was compiled into a list.


This detects current cheating.

Quote:
Our estimate is that the exploiting parties made between six and 12 trillion ISK from this exploit. Taking the data available at the time of discovery, which showed the length of time the reactors had been used for the exploit, and looking at the per-unit value of the exploited items, showed us that the minimum was six trillion. Taking into account reactors that have been used historically and considering higher prices in the past, we believe the upper limit of how much could have been made to be around 12 trillion.


Here the current cheating is used as a minimum. "We believe the upper limit of how much could have been made" It sounds like they estimated it not measured it. But you are right that it doesn't prove anything. It could just be sloppy writing.

KISOGOKU
Posted - 2009.02.21 06:32:00 - [231]
 

Tip for lazy ,Go to first page and read CCP Diagoras post
Originally by: Tari Redhe.

Yes, its quite possible I'm wrong. It can be that they only detected current cheating, or it can be that they detected past cheating too.

voidvim
Minmatar
Genco
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2009.02.21 20:35:00 - [232]
 

A detailed and comprehensive analysis - thank you

Jin Entres
Malevolent Intervention
Posted - 2009.03.01 16:04:00 - [233]
 

Edited by: Jin Entres on 01/03/2009 16:07:40
Considering the significant impact this exploit had on the prices of T2 items which use Ferrogel etc., one consequence of the exploitation could be argued to be the maintenance of the perception that the T2 market for these items both for manufacturing viability and cost efficiency of use was reasonable and balanced. This illusion of balance, if you will, may have resulted in a failure to recognise an imbalance that required action. It would be reasonable, therefore, to evaluate whether the exploit in fact did the market a favour (not the players in question obviously) and if a problem that was hidden by the effects of the exploitation now requires addressing as part of undoing the consequences of the exploitation.

Juang Mao
Posted - 2009.03.05 22:50:00 - [234]
 

Applaud CCP and lets not dwell on that which has past...

This whole situation is bad, has been dealt with responsibly by the deevs and staff, and on a complaint/petition numbers of 3 out of how many players? Its not hard to understand why it wasnt investigated as a major issue.

However, this issue has raised something that CCP has failed to deal with in the entire history of the game. The knock-on effect on markets supply and demand (prices) of removing such a large quantity of required production goods. This has not only led to the alliances controlling these high end goods to over price there produce, but in turn has sent the high end composite market into a spiral. This may not have as much effect on the bigger corporation, but as a snall production corp it has all but devasted our production. Alliance Only Tournaments. 0.0 Space control (sovreignty), Fleet Warfare, and so many more things we could all name it has become a game of big numbers.

This situation cannot be allowed to continue, without the end of an ingenious game.

I personally speak from experience as an ex-organiser of an events company we soon realised by having Uber Alliances, the background of our created world soon began to die as people no longer wanted to be 'one man in a crowd of thousands'. In other words, some wish to remain independant.

To put it another way, the world needs small to medium businesses in a 'real-world' economy, as any good economist would know. The Eve universe is no exception.

Its time for CCP to open up the moon mining and resources for more people - as the subscribers grow - so will demand. (incidentally this could be done easily and sensibly by using numbers in realtion to pos system sec status - i.e 0.0 Pos = max production, Pos in 0.1 = 90%, and so on and so forth until you get to 0.7 Pos = 20%. Yes some may say these numbers are too high - others will say too low - the numbers arent the issue. But this example would allow smaller producers to gain access to components (small amounts) without being ripped off by every alliance and market manipulator going.

It may also be time to finally review the skill book and market seeded BPO scams too. After a;;, its only been 3 and a half years since they said they fixed it. EmbarassedEmbarassedEmbarassed

Personally i also wonder if this game is so well rigged to the Super-Alliances - hust how much of the isk is flying out as RMT - which only seems to be growing.

Alya Downs
Caldari
Posted - 2009.04.22 23:20:00 - [235]
 

Thank you for taking the time to explain in detail how this issue was handled. It is greatly appreciated.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]

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