Jump to content
NQ-Naerais

“Marketplace Heist” Response

Recommended Posts

Just now, ONIXXX said:

Why do you have such confidence? after all, you can reconfigure RDMS using illegal methods, and get the B button by criminal means, is this possible? Yes, are you sure that the B button was received by an incorrect RDMS setting? no

The market was publicly editable.  This is not a disputed statement. There were multiple people who reported being able to go into build mode. They had reported it on Discord to several NQ- members. 

 

Some people had the sense to walk away from it - other did not. 

 

I don't disagree that walking away was the smart move - but I stand by stance that a construct that allows the entry into build mode is free game. Regardless of whose construct it is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

NQ is clearly and quite clever actually spinning the events by using phrasing to make it _appear_ they have information that shows this was both malicious and premeditated which I simply do not buy as we _know_ that several players reported that market 15 was open and they were able to enter build mode on Discord and also, in these instances, generally the more obvious explanation is the correct one.. And that is a dev made a booboo and forgot to lock down the construct after moving it .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mordgier said:

The market was publicly editable.  This is not a disputed statement. There were multiple people who reported being able to go into build mode. They had reported it on Discord to several NQ- members. 

 

Some people had the sense to walk away from it - other did not. 

 

I don't disagree that walking away was the smart move - but I stand by stance that a construct that allows the entry into build mode is free game. Regardless of whose construct it is.

 

RDMS settings are stored inside the structure, if someone reconfigured it using hacking or illegal methods, then the B button will be available to everyone, not only to the one who committed the hack, this is not an excuse, you should not be completely sure that this is 100% not the correct RDMS setting, most likely an exploit was applied that changed the rights, after which the B button became available to everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

Then when they are impacted themselves they instaban and act very quickly

Maybe I'm more sympathetic because we (different dev team) have been guilty of that too in the past. Developing something you get alot of claims and if you investigate a certain amount, every time with the same result of "user error", you start to classify and dismiss it - until suddenly, by chance, you experience the same issue and have to roll back. It's not beautiful, but it happens.

 

14 minutes ago, Mordgier said:

So is misconfigured RDMS an exploit or user error?

Being able to destroy NOS that are not meant as PVE target always qualifies as exploit.

 

14 minutes ago, Mordgier said:

RDMS was set to allow public access.

By NQ? Proof?

 

I think you just try to nail me down with questions that imply a line of reasoning that's irrelevant. I've said everything I had on my mind and it's up to you to see and respect my side or simply disagree. I see your side and I disagree deeply, feeling you're trying to twist things in your favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

 

Exactly this. By being dumb and making the mistake of setting the construct to public, NQ in my opinion voided their own EULA/TOS or whatever and the latest clarification on their ruleset applies, which reads ; "RDMS theft is allowed"

 

NQ bends the rules here as they are butthurt for being the victim of their own ignorance in not setting RDMS correctly

 

Period

What grinds my gears is that player owned markets are coming.

 

It's only a matter of time till they do, and then an org will build a market - and sooner or later some org will setup a market and screw up their RDMS perms.

 

We all know what NQ will say when that org complains about their market getting looted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, vertex said:

Proof?

I love how you use request for proof as your last ditch argument. Proof is right there. The same issue, being able to edit the construct, was reported on multiple occasions. Plain and simple. Or are you suggesting all those people, independently of each other, all used an exploit or hack? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, vertex said:

Maybe I'm more sympathetic because we (different dev team) have been guilty of that too in the past. Developing something you get alot of claims and if you investigate a certain amount, every time with the same result of "user error", you start to classify and dismiss it - until suddenly, by chance, you experience the same issue and have to roll back. It's not beautiful, but it happens.

Except NQ did nothing, they banned the players and went back to sleep. The cases logged for this impacting players remain untouched

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vertex said:

Maybe I'm more sympathetic because we (different dev team) have been guilty of that too in the past. Developing something you get alot of claims and if you investigate a certain amount, every time with the same result of "user error", you start to classify and dismiss it - until suddenly, by chance, you experience the same issue and have to roll back. It's not beautiful, but it happens.

 

Being able to destroy NOS that are not meant as PVE target always qualifies as exploit.

 

Proof?

 

I think you just try to nail me down with questions that imply a line of reasoning that's irrelevant. I've said everything I had on my mind and it's up to you to see and respect my side or simply disagree. I see your side and I disagree deeply, feeling you're trying to twist things in your favor.

You...you want me to provide proof that people could go into build mode? Like for real? Do you want me to prove that water is wet while I'm at it?

lxppkrllf2u51.png?width=1583&format=png&

x9c0dpllf2u51.png?width=1547&format=png&

0t8sezmlf2u51.png?width=1588&format=png&

 

 

Nobody but you disputes that multiple people could enter build mode.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah sorry, I've already fixed that in the meantime to read

10 minutes ago, vertex said:

By NQ? Proof?

 

And as I already said: RDMS policies are not the only thing that can lead to the software granting access. So asking for proof refers to something that would prove that an NQ employee added a policy by mistake that granted public build access. Please don't try to tear that apart just because I wasn't repeating the specific definition again. I think I made my opinion rather clear: I think it's not proven that NQ fumbled and created such a policy and there are more possible explanations. That's why I react to absolute statements like those Mordgier made with a request for proof.

 

  

3 minutes ago, Mordgier said:

Nobody but you disputes that multiple people could enter build mode.

No, I don't and I never have :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ONIXXX said:

RDMS settings are stored inside the structure, if someone reconfigured it using hacking or illegal methods, then the B button will be available to everyone, not only to the one who committed the hack, this is not an excuse, you should not be completely sure that this is 100% not the correct RDMS setting, most likely an exploit was applied that changed the rights, after which the B button became available to everyone

And if THAT is possible - and I am not saying it's not.

 

What is NQ doing about all the cases where players lost their stuff and NQ just went "lol git gud at RDMS scrub"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and at least one person was in a steamers chat admitting to being the person who use an exploit to rob them and both boasted and gloated about it. he also sent me a message specifically detailing my base layout so I have no reason to not assume he is the same person who emptied containers on my base before that using the same exploit.

 

This was added to my report but obviously NQ can't be bothered to look into this even when this was escalated to the CS lead.

 

Frankly , the moment an exploiter in game comes into a streamers chat like that they break EULA/TOS of not only DU but Twitch as well

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, vertex said:

Yeah sorry, I've already fixed that in the meantime to read

 

And as I already said: RDMS policies are not the only thing that can lead to the software granting access. So asking for proof refers to something that would prove that an NQ employee added a policy by mistake that granted public build access. Please don't try to tear that apart just because I wasn't repeating the specific definition again. I think I made my opinion rather clear: I think it's not proven that NQ fumbled and created such a policy and there are more possible explanations. That's why I react to absolute statements like those Mordgier made with a request for proof.

 

  

No, I don't and I never have :) 

You want proof that NQ had misconfigured RDMS?!

 

But only NQ can provide THAT proof.

 

You know they won't.

 

I know they won't.

 

We all know they won't.

 

 

It's not even relevant - because here's the thing.

 

Either RDMS was not configured correctly by NQ. NQ's fault.

 

OR

 

RDMS is so buggy and prone to exploits that players can easily bypass it and have been for months and NQ has ignored it. NQs fault - and WAY WAY worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conspiracy time. Did player action result in the market data getting wiped, or is this a False Flag operation from NQ to make an excuse to ban the people who disassembled their market? Watch for Market 15's orders to mysteriously reappear soon, as they were never really deleted or lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Emptiness said:

Conspiracy time. Did player action result in the market data getting wiped, or is this a False Flag operation from NQ to make an excuse to ban the people who disassembled their market? Watch for Market 15's orders to mysteriously reappear soon.

I want to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Emptiness said:

Conspiracy time. Did player action result in the market data getting wiped, or is this a False Flag operation from NQ to make an excuse to ban the people who disassembled their market? Watch for Market 15's orders to mysteriously reappear soon.

NQ can fix the orders - the issue as I understand, and this is really just me talking out of my ass (hurr hurr), is that once the market terminals were all gone, the DB that stored the orders for that market lost the reference to the market. So now you have a bunch of orders tied to a market that just doesn't exist anymore.

 

A 'replacement' market created in the game will likely have a whole different element ID meaning they would need to go through and take the old ID for market 15 and replace all the orders to the 'new' ID in the backend DB. It's work and it sucks and I'd hate to have to do it if I was in their shoes. Any and all DB changes like this are scary and error prone...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mordgier Yeah, I can see that might be an issue. Tho I would admit it if it was my mistake, hence I don't rule it out completely. You say "You know they won't", addressing me, and again state an absolute that you can't be sure about - that's our main difference here. I don't feel comfortable when you state things as facts that are "most probable in your opinion" at best. Prime example: I don't know if they won't. And I can't speak for everyone else, like you do. Would you be a dear and drop that habit? It's really annoying. Just a request tho :) 

 

But this excursion now successfully dragged me away from my initial stance, which I still hold: ban is justified and even if players might argue that it's unclear with POS, it still is very clear with NOS. So there's one more clear line - and that's better than no clear line at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Emptiness said:

Conspiracy time.

I have no problem believing NQ did in fact design it so that all the trade data would be lost or un-referenced if the in game item was removed. There is ample (NDA) examples of them previously doing basic design flaws like this. And there was no way the players could know this before hand when they started tearing down the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mordgier said:

A 'replacement' market created in the game will likely have a whole different element ID meaning they would need to go through and take the old ID for market 15 and replace all the orders to the 'new' ID. It's work and it sucks and I'd hate to have to do it if I was in their shoes.

UPDATE TABLE du_marketorders SET market_id='[NEWMARKET15]' WHERE market_id='[OLDMARKET15]';

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mordgier said:

NQ can fix the orders - the issue as I understand, and this is really just me talking out of my ass (hurr hurr), is that once the market terminals were all gone, the DB that stored the orders for that market lost the reference to the market. So now you have a bunch of orders tied to a market that just doesn't exist anymore.

If that is correct, and it sound plausible, then that is just very bad database design. If a market disappears, the linkID in he database should not be affected, it shoudl just throw an error when queried due to the destination not existing

 

 

But it should be obvious by now that database design for DU is "fragile" at best for a number of reasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is NQ the game devs or not? If the data needs a certain reference, then recreate that reference.

The real reason NQ is mad, is because they where caught with their pants down. And it created more work in their already busy schedule. But that is their problem, not ours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think it's too early to say they didn't do anything. If they previously thought it's just user error all the time and now they finally trace the exploit, it could be days or weeks until they've worked it all out. But we might see more results by then - maybe they can even trace other instances of this and finally compensate the players who made the tickets.

 

Sure, from past experience it's easy to jump to the conclusion that NQ will never change - but DU changes and NQ evolves - I don't think we're just treading water here :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...