I would like to set the record straight about the word "EXPLOIT"

eternalshockcable

I have not used a bug but I don't condone development banning players for the use of an in game bug.
Please stop calling it an "exploit". You're using the word completely wrong.

I know its common in online gaming , for people to use this term EXPLOITING in branding player actions that use a "bug" as being morally wrong.
That though, isn't an exploit.

This is the actual definition of "EXPLOIT":
A program or system designed to take advantage of a particular error or security vulnerability in computers or networks.

A program or system. This word refers to third party software.

Not crappy code, that a player uses, that the development provides to you in which you happen to notice something is messing up.
So if your code comes across the player's computer WRONG, this isn't illegal for them to use to how they see fit. You could say its "ethically" wrong.
Argue principal or just state you don't want users to do (x) for what ever (x) is that is determined morally wrong.

But stating its someone's duty to go out their way to report these " bugs" to you is absurd.

Then going as to ban people for using bugs, nope that's wrong too.
I wonder how many players have been banned for the usage of bugs and not knowing that they are in fact not " exploiting"?

I guess I'm too much a nerd to know what's actually what.

Yes, morally you could say its wrong to use "bugged" programming to one's advantage.
Legally its not. When you use this word "exploit" you're not even talking about bugged code, you're talking two different things.
I just wish, you would use the right wording.


Anyways, its not "exploiting".

Regards,
theshockcable

Sauce_B055

eternalshockcable wrote: »

I guess I'm too much a nerd to know what's actually what.

Not nerd enough to know the difference between a verb and a noun, apparently.

exploit
verb
make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhand.
"the company was exploiting a legal loophole"

exploit
noun
a software tool designed to take advantage of a flaw in a computer system, typically for malicious purposes such as installing malware.
"if someone you don't know tweets you a link, it's either spam, an exploit, or probably both"

I'd say "exploiting a bug" fits the definition just fine.

Grizzbeorn

Sauce_B055 wrote: »

I'd say "exploiting a bug" fits the definition just fine.

Absolutely it does.

Bucky_13

Do you have any kind of source or reference to that definition? Like any?

Sauce_B055 wrote: »

eternalshockcable wrote: »

I guess I'm too much a nerd to know what's actually what.

Not nerd enough to know the difference between a verb and a noun, apparently.

exploit
verb
make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhand.
"the company was exploiting a legal loophole"

exploit
noun
a software tool designed to take advantage of a flaw in a computer system, typically for malicious purposes such as installing malware.
"if someone you don't know tweets you a link, it's either spam, an exploit, or probably both"

I'd say "exploiting a bug" fits the definition just fine.

Agree with you 100%, but I would like to add that the definition of the noun "Exploit" that a lot of people would probably be more familiar with would be:
Exploit
Noun
a brave, interesting, or unusual act:
Example: I took out the list of Professor Challenger's exploits, and I read it over under the electric lamp.
—Arthur Conan Doyle

So I guess the sentence "His exploits of exploiting exploitable exploits in ESO was legendary" is valid (minus some potential grammar issues because that's never been my strong suite) because English....

Dagoth_Rac

If you take a $1000 out of your ATM and the ATM resets your balance to what is was before you took out the $1000, that is not a free $1000. And it is especially not a free $1000 if you furtively look around before taking another $1000 out and another $1000, etc. That is not a "moral" question. It is not an ethical question of whether you want to give the money back or not. It is theft and illegal activity and banks absolutely have taken people to court over it. By your definition, a human could never "exploit", only a computer system. But exploitation has existed well before computers and been a crime well before computers. You seem to be using a very explicit and limited denotation of "exploit" and ignoring the broader connotations.

Plus, dictionary definitions mean nothing. Every dictionary can have a slightly different definition. A word can mean multiple things based on context, sometimes even opposite things ("cleave" can mean both "join together" or "split apart"). Dictionaries give very brief descriptions, with no intention of getting into the real world depth of a word. It has no bearing whatsoever on the law in the real world or the in-game terms of service. Google "The Appeal to Definition Fallacy".

tauriel01

LOL... look up the definition of 'nitpicking"

kringled_1

Under the circumstances, it is kind of funny that ZOS has chosen to stay with the word exploit to also describe heavy attacking an off-balance enemy, especially when it shows giant words in the middle of my screen telling me to exploit!

SeaGtGruff

"Exploit" can have a variety of specific meanings and usages, as can most words. Some of its meanings can apply to actions which are acceptable, whereas other meanings apply to actions which are questionable at best and dishonest at worst.

When ZOS uses the word "exploit" to refer to an action which is unacceptable and ban-worthy, they get to decide what actions fall into that category, because ESO is their property and they make the rules regarding it.

danno8

In addition to what others have stated about your incorrect understanding of the word "exploit" I would also add that you seem to be misunderstanding or misusing the word "illegal".

Who do you think gets to define what is "illegal" within the confines of this game?

Tenthirty2

So, you got banned then?

wilykcat

danno8 wrote: »

In addition to what others have stated about your incorrect understanding of the word "exploit" I would also add that you seem to be misunderstanding or misusing the word "illegal".

Who do you think gets to define what is "illegal" within the confines of this game?

In response to your question:
The moderators and the in-game guards.

TechMaybeHic

This is like saying "I went for a run" is not correct because "run" is something a computer or car engine does.

kringled_1

wilykcat wrote: »

danno8 wrote: »

In addition to what others have stated about your incorrect understanding of the word "exploit" I would also add that you seem to be misunderstanding or misusing the word "illegal".

Who do you think gets to define what is "illegal" within the confines of this game?

The moderators; they enforce the rules and read reports 👍.

I don't believe zos forum moderators in general have any ability to set or enforce in-game policies.

Marcus684

I seem to recall a similar situation in the past where someone was trying to argue what the definition of "is" is.

Every person who took advantage of this bug, "exploited" it, should have known that what they were doing could get them in trouble. Every time there's a wave of bans for an exploit there's always someone who tries to argue that "it's not my fault ZOS writes crappy code" or something to that effect, even though it's right in the Code of Conduct. Game codes have bugs, and usually it's the players that discover it first. What separates the exploiters (cheaters) from everyone else is what they do with that discovery.

Kirawolfe

I think the bigger problem is that many folks had no idea why they were banned.

They just walked into a zone.

Then they got banned, then they got treated like they'd done something wrong, when they hadn't. The software is bugged. That's not their fault, that's the developer's fault.

Slapping someone on the wrist for something you did is a *** move.

Anyone who noticed it and used it to their advantage to get more seals was definitely exploiting a bug. So yeah, the language applies here.

But that leaves a lot of people banned for simply playing and this was not handled well by Zos.

SkaraMinoc

You can exploit a bug without 3rd party software.

In Ultima Online from 1997 to 1998, you could cast a Fourth Circle spell called Fire Field while standing underneath a staircase in a player home. This would cause you to gain 10x the amount of Resisting Spells skill. You could get max level spell resist in 1-2 days whereas it might take you 12+ months of normal gameplay.

This was an exploit and eventually patched.

Marcus684

Kirawolfe wrote: »

I think the bigger problem is that many folks had no idea why they were banned.

They just walked into a zone.

Then they got banned, then they got treated like they'd done something wrong, when they hadn't. The software is bugged. That's not their fault, that's the developer's fault.

Slapping someone on the wrist for something you did is a *** move.

Anyone who noticed it and used it to their advantage to get more seals was definitely exploiting a bug. So yeah, the language applies here.

But that leaves a lot of people banned for simply playing and this was not handled well by Zos.

I'd like to see the proof that anyone got banned for "walking into a zone", as I doubt that ZOS would write an auto-ban script this broad. It just makes no sense.

Cheaters always try to minimize their wrong-doing, so we really can't take anyone's word on why they were banned. The player and ZOS are the only one's that know the actual truth, and ZOS will 100% not give any details, which makes all of the speculation here worthless.

This isn't to say that no one got unjustly banned. There is no way to set up criteria for auto-banning that will only catch cheaters and catch them every time. It's on ZOS to make sure they minimize the number of players unjustly banned, and get their accounts restored as quickly as possible.

Alinhbo_Tyaka

Kirawolfe wrote: »

I think the bigger problem is that many folks had no idea why they were banned.

They just walked into a zone.

Then they got banned, then they got treated like they'd done something wrong, when they hadn't. The software is bugged. That's not their fault, that's the developer's fault.

Slapping someone on the wrist for something you did is a *** move.

Anyone who noticed it and used it to their advantage to get more seals was definitely exploiting a bug. So yeah, the language applies here.

But that leaves a lot of people banned for simply playing and this was not handled well by Zos.

I think the biggest slap in the face was after acknowledging the bug and that a number of players were banned incorrectly ZOS continued to act as if it was the players fault for being banned. It only added to the player dissatisfaction with how ZOS banned first and investigated later rather than take less accusatory action such as disabling Endeavors while they investigated.

DUTCH_REAPER

I think there are some people who play legit and accidents happen due to an external cause outside their control. And others who take advantage.

kringled_1

Marcus684 wrote: »

Kirawolfe wrote: »

I think the bigger problem is that many folks had no idea why they were banned.

They just walked into a zone.

Then they got banned, then they got treated like they'd done something wrong, when they hadn't. The software is bugged. That's not their fault, that's the developer's fault.

Slapping someone on the wrist for something you did is a *** move.

Anyone who noticed it and used it to their advantage to get more seals was definitely exploiting a bug. So yeah, the language applies here.

But that leaves a lot of people banned for simply playing and this was not handled well by Zos.

I'd like to see the proof that anyone got banned for "walking into a zone", as I doubt that ZOS would write an auto-ban script this broad. It just makes no sense.

Cheaters always try to minimize their wrong-doing, so we really can't take anyone's word on why they were banned. The player and ZOS are the only one's that know the actual truth, and ZOS will 100% not give any details, which makes all of the speculation here worthless.

This isn't to say that no one got unjustly banned. There is no way to set up criteria for auto-banning that will only catch cheaters and catch them every time. It's on ZOS to make sure they minimize the number of players unjustly banned, and get their accounts restored as quickly as possible.

The problem is that for a few days in July, in reaper's March on ps-eu, walking into the zone did reset your endeavors. There's a bug thread about it, with multiple people reporting, and some troubleshooting from Gina. Some of those people in that thread also were reporting a ban last week.
Outside of that situation, resetting endeavors seems to be pretty rare (other than the expected daily reset of course).

Marcus684

kringled_1 wrote: »

Marcus684 wrote: »

Kirawolfe wrote: »

I think the bigger problem is that many folks had no idea why they were banned.

They just walked into a zone.

Then they got banned, then they got treated like they'd done something wrong, when they hadn't. The software is bugged. That's not their fault, that's the developer's fault.

Slapping someone on the wrist for something you did is a *** move.

Anyone who noticed it and used it to their advantage to get more seals was definitely exploiting a bug. So yeah, the language applies here.

But that leaves a lot of people banned for simply playing and this was not handled well by Zos.

I'd like to see the proof that anyone got banned for "walking into a zone", as I doubt that ZOS would write an auto-ban script this broad. It just makes no sense.

Cheaters always try to minimize their wrong-doing, so we really can't take anyone's word on why they were banned. The player and ZOS are the only one's that know the actual truth, and ZOS will 100% not give any details, which makes all of the speculation here worthless.

This isn't to say that no one got unjustly banned. There is no way to set up criteria for auto-banning that will only catch cheaters and catch them every time. It's on ZOS to make sure they minimize the number of players unjustly banned, and get their accounts restored as quickly as possible.

The problem is that for a few days in July, in reaper's March on ps-eu, walking into the zone did reset your endeavors. There's a bug thread about it, with multiple people reporting, and some troubleshooting from Gina. Some of those people in that thread also were reporting a ban last week.
Outside of that situation, resetting endeavors seems to be pretty rare (other than the expected daily reset of course).

Ah I see. Thanks for the clarification. I could see people completing an endeavor multiple times without noticing it had reset and completed again, as I rarely scrutinize the loot feed when I'm doing overland or dungeons. It should be pretty obvious to ZOS when they review the logs who was actively exploiting this.

merpins

Dagoth_Rac

Kirawolfe wrote: »

I think the bigger problem is that many folks had no idea why they were banned.

They just walked into a zone.

Then they got banned, then they got treated like they'd done something wrong, when they hadn't. The software is bugged. That's not their fault, that's the developer's fault.

Slapping someone on the wrist for something you did is a *** move.

Anyone who noticed it and used it to their advantage to get more seals was definitely exploiting a bug. So yeah, the language applies here.

But that leaves a lot of people banned for simply playing and this was not handled well by Zos.

If there is a bug in the transaction processing code of an ATM, I guarantee you that the bank will start disabling debit cards first and asking questions later. Whether it was an accident or an exploit, if customers have the wrong balance in their account or received too much money, the cards will be disabled immediately until further notice, both those who received it by accident and those who recognized the issue and tried to take advantage of it.

Should ZOS not have allowed this bug into the game in the first place? Absolutely. But once it is in the wild, you don't have much choice but to disable accounts that received an unintended benefit. This is pretty standard operating procedure anytime bugs are found in a system that involves currency. Having your ESO account disabled while ZOS investigate suspicious activity is no different than a bank disabling your credit card while investigating suspicious activity.

I have had my credit card disabled due to suspicious activity. And it was really annoying and had a lot more real world impact than having a video game account disabled. And the card was reactivated after they took a deeper look and realized the activity was benign. But I completely understand them not leaving an account with suspicious activity active while they investigated. Not only would that give me more time to engage in fraud if I was a criminal, but leaving card active and having new activity going in and out would make it harder to audit and clear the activity that was initially deemed suspicious. When you are trying to reconcile a general ledger, having the ledger continue to update can make things much messier and make the job much harder.

Bucky_13

Marcus684 wrote: »

kringled_1 wrote: »

Marcus684 wrote: »

Kirawolfe wrote: »

I think the bigger problem is that many folks had no idea why they were banned.

They just walked into a zone.

Then they got banned, then they got treated like they'd done something wrong, when they hadn't. The software is bugged. That's not their fault, that's the developer's fault.

Slapping someone on the wrist for something you did is a *** move.

Anyone who noticed it and used it to their advantage to get more seals was definitely exploiting a bug. So yeah, the language applies here.

But that leaves a lot of people banned for simply playing and this was not handled well by Zos.

I'd like to see the proof that anyone got banned for "walking into a zone", as I doubt that ZOS would write an auto-ban script this broad. It just makes no sense.

Cheaters always try to minimize their wrong-doing, so we really can't take anyone's word on why they were banned. The player and ZOS are the only one's that know the actual truth, and ZOS will 100% not give any details, which makes all of the speculation here worthless.

This isn't to say that no one got unjustly banned. There is no way to set up criteria for auto-banning that will only catch cheaters and catch them every time. It's on ZOS to make sure they minimize the number of players unjustly banned, and get their accounts restored as quickly as possible.

The problem is that for a few days in July, in reaper's March on ps-eu, walking into the zone did reset your endeavors. There's a bug thread about it, with multiple people reporting, and some troubleshooting from Gina. Some of those people in that thread also were reporting a ban last week.
Outside of that situation, resetting endeavors seems to be pretty rare (other than the expected daily reset of course).

Ah I see. Thanks for the clarification. I could see people completing an endeavor multiple times without noticing it had reset and completed again, as I rarely scrutinize the loot feed when I'm doing overland or dungeons. It should be pretty obvious to ZOS when they review the logs who was actively exploiting this.

I agree that it should, but it does seem it wasn't since they seem to have banned a bunch of players that weren't intentionally exploiting this bug.

This is not the first time this have happened, there was an issue a while back (at least a year I think) where a bunch of trading players got banned on faulty grounds. ZOS eventually backed down after it became obvious the players were right, not sure if they apologized for their mistake that time.

JoeCapricorn

Bucky_13 wrote: »

This is not the first time this have happened, there was an issue a while back (at least a year I think) where a bunch of trading players got banned on faulty grounds. ZOS eventually backed down after it became obvious the players were right, not sure if they apologized for their mistake that time.

I remember when they posted an update on false invalid bans from December 2021

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/588031/update-on-recent-action-against-some-eso-accounts

I feel like they need to do the same thing, because people were mass-banned for normal gameplay behavior.

Ghostbane

No one has combated and policed against exploits and hacks more than the legendary, eternal SHOCKCABLE.

eternalshockcable

I see some examples of confusion

Someone is still confused about if something in game happens within the code that allows you to do (x) which I already covered this. See my above post. This isn't an exploit. Its still just a bug.

The bank is not the same as what we're talking about .

Now with endeavors, I seen something about a "bug" where the endeavors reset. This is simple and the most effective way to both eliminate the problem and keep the customer.

Just get rid of their ability to contribute to endeavors.

Mistaken or invalid bans, this is a big thing in online games and happens more often than people believe.

p1.

kargen27

eternalshockcable wrote: »

I see some examples of confusion

Someone is still confused about if something in game happens within the code that allows you to do (x) which I already covered this. See my above post. This isn't an exploit. Its still just a bug.

The bank is not the same as what we're talking about .

Now with endeavors, I seen something about a "bug" where the endeavors reset. This is simple and the most effective way to both eliminate the problem and keep the customer.

Just get rid of their ability to contribute to endeavors.

Mistaken or invalid bans, this is a big thing in online games and happens more often than people believe.

p1.

If there is a bug in the game and you change the way you play to take advantage of the bug you are exploiting the bug. Taking advantage of a bug in game is against the Terms of Service Agreement. Doesn't matter what you call the behavior it is against the rules you agreed to.
Players are not being banned because there was a bug. They are being banned for exploiting that bug.

eternalshockcable

No one has combated and policed against exploits and hacks more than the legendary, eternal SHOCKCABLE.

In short this is true. I got banned years ago because, I "supposedly" cheated.

Over the years I have became good at knowing these things are different in nature actual cheating and the usage of bugs.
For example the difference between a "hacker" and a "vulnerability tester" you would be surprised is just semantical wording. It is just who , what , or why you're doing it.

It basically comes down to semantics of things like "you're taking advantage of a bug" rather than using a program .

Well, why is this bug in the game in the first place? Right? You could literally go round in round about why it wouldn't be your fault. Or why you shouldn't have a duty to report it. Are you getting paid for reporting?
Hell no , I don't get paid for it. I know that much. I have 50 pages of emails to prove it.


But are you gaining a monetary value of "using a bug"? I hadn't checked maybe someone can tell me but I think endeavor items are BOA?
If that's the case then, it even leaves more reason for someone shouldn't get banned.

If they aren't BOA even after you gift them then who's fault would it be? Mechanics or the person giving them away or selling them for gold right?
So you have to really deep dive into the rabbit hole and find the answers for yourself.

Maybe suspended should be proper for those that supposedly abuse bugs with an actual reason than "we detected a cheat" .

I was like, Bro?!!
when I seen this... I was like WTF?! Y'all getting banned for no reasonings?

I feel sorry for everyone that gotten these kinds of emails without some sort of descriptive reasoning.

At the end of the day is it really ruining the economy?

Keep in mind, they cared about a product as much as you did they would listen to you, if they don't , then they don't. Simple as that. Take anything that happens with grain of salt.

If any bug makes it to live then it wasn't that big of a deal on PTS. Let that sink in.
Or it hadn't happened on pts ,thus meaning its not your fault, at all. One would argue.

Thanks for reading,
-Shock

spartaxoxo

kargen27 wrote: »

Players are not being banned because there was a bug. They are being banned for exploiting that bug.

A lot of players did get banned and unbanned because they simply encountered the bug. ZOS even said in their post that they know it's the case some people didn't even know a bug had occured.

That being said, the OP is wrong that a bug cannot be exploited. Exploit is the correct term for such behavior. And the players that remained banned after they unbanned all the innocent players caught up in the autobans were people with egregious levels of extra seals, indicating that they did exploit the bug. As you correctly described, such behavior is against the TOS.

Wolfkeks

I guess you can exploit a bug (or even if it is not the right word ZOS is still using it as a way to say that you should not take advantage of bugs)

I was thinking about the bug in AS where you could streak outside the map and kill the boss for the skin (similar thing happened in MoL) and they called it an exploit then

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/380210/response-to-the-veteran-hard-mode-asylum-sanctorium-trial-exploit-nov-10/p1

(This was ofc way worse than the endeavors bug)