Are there any weird glitches going on with trades

Someone offered me 10 white scrolls for a godly piece of equip I scrolled worth roughly 1.7billion.

I was wondering if there is any glitches going on that would allow him to take my item without giving me his end of the trade. Since white scrolls i'm assuming are worth 300m each? clearly, the deal is in my favour.

Thanks in advance

might be duped, in which case the white scrolls would go down in price soon, but there are some trade hacks (iirc) that allow the trade to be one sided, in that they keep all items. I would take the white scrolls personally, since its just another thing to re sell.

might be duped, in which case the white scrolls would go down in price soon, but there are some trade hacks (iirc) that allow the trade to be one sided, in that they keep all items. I would take the white scrolls personally, since its just another thing to re sell.

To clarify this, I dont recall any documented proof of said trade hacks, its all hearsay. Dupe hacks are possible, but im not going to say they're back, those may just be remnants on some old dupe hacker's mule.

If you wait for him to put up the white scrolls in the trade window first then you are perfectly safe afaik.

Someone offered me 10 white scrolls for a godly piece of equip I scrolled worth roughly 1.7billion.

I was wondering if there is any glitches going on that would allow him to take my item without giving me his end of the trade. Since white scrolls i'm assuming are worth 300m each? clearly, the deal is in my favour.

Thanks in advance

Odds are this is a confidence scam.

You can only trade 9 items at a time, so the scammer has you trade "one for one" first, with a promise of the other nine after they've gotten their goods.

They may even show you 9 white scrolls to prove they have them, but cancel out and insist on the 1:1 "to be fair" and to "prove you're not gonna scam them".

Odds are this is a confidence scam.

You can only trade 9 items at a time, so the scammer has you trade "one for one" first, with a promise of the other nine after they've gotten their goods.

They may even show you 9 white scrolls to prove they have them, but cancel out and insist on the 1:1 "to be fair" and to "prove you're not gonna scam them".

That's a fairly lame scam. I'd ask them "why not put down all 10 in one slot?"

That's a fairly lame scam. I'd ask them "why not put down all 10 in one slot?"

Aren't white scrolls 1 to a slot for some absurd nexon reason?

*Edit Nope, they're not. I must be mixing scams, so it's probably not this reason. Unless they're counting on someone else not knowing that and falling for it, but seems unlikely. Course I find it remarkable people fall for the 1:1 and give you the rest later scam, period.

I can assure you there is no such thing, at least at this present moment, as trade hacking (just the usual press alt+tab etc.. that's been running since beta)
2 option here: old white scrolls dupe hacking or one crazy gash noob with no idea of real value of godly scrolled items. There is 2 things that Nexon really put hard work on is trade & shop processes, there still might be some holes in the storage process but that where the last dupe hack came from so I don't really think so.

P.S.: there won't be dupe hack for a very very long time, actually Nexon, for once, did its job quite well... hopefully, and I'm so glad with it cause it was a real pain in the whole MS community (personally why just Nexon can't add a hash-value test for all .wz files at running time, I mean Lunia for instance got no problem getting ride off hacking by putting everything server side)

personally why just Nexon can't add a hash-value test for all .wz files at running time, I mean Lunia for instance got no problem getting ride off hacking by putting everything server side

 Extremely off topic counter-argument

A hash value test isnt the same as putting everything server side. A hash test can be fooled, quite easily. You can either have the client send the server a lie, or just have the client agree to everything the server asks it. Either way, it's not a decent solution because the process can be hijacked and false information can be inserted into the communication channel.

Putting everything server side in the first place would've made them virtually unhackable, yes, which is why having the client serve as nothing more than a dumb terminal for the game is the Best Practice. Unfortunately making a change of that nature is virtually impossible without breaking compatibility and interopability with all the other MapleStory's out there, not to mention an administrative nightmare for the staff who'd have essentially rewrite it from the ground up, and that drastic shift in the processing load (which today is predominately done on the end users machine) to the servers would leave their current world's hardware setup way underpowered more than likely. You think Maple has lag issues now, imagine it's current hardware trying to do all the combined work that every player's PC does today.

While Lunia being all server sided does help with the hacking it does not stop everything. I played lunia from CB and it was all server sided then. It didn't stop people from PEing. I remember they used to do them quests where you deliver a letter to a stage and it was instant repeatable. The PEers would just stay in square and send the letter from there over and over. I will admit, CB and OB pretty much had no gameguard or whatever at all. But people can bypass that anyway.
On another note having everything server sided has a lot of down sides. And they can be extremely anoying down sides at times.

More on topic thought its funny that you should mention Lunia in a thread about trading seeing as Lunias trade setup used to be the worst around. People were so easily scammed without them doing anything.

 Extremely off topic counter-argument

A hash value test isnt the same as putting everything server side. A hash test can be fooled, quite easily. You can either have the client send the server a lie, or just have the client agree to everything the server asks it. Either way, it's not a decent solution because the process can be hijacked and false information can be inserted into the communication channel.

Putting everything server side in the first place would've made them virtually unhackable, yes, which is why having the client serve as nothing more than a dumb terminal for the game is the Best Practice. Unfortunately making a change of that nature is virtually impossible without breaking compatibility and interopability with all the other MapleStory's out there, not to mention an administrative nightmare for the staff who'd have essentially rewrite it from the ground up, and that drastic shift in the processing load (which today is predominately done on the end users machine) to the servers would leave their current world's hardware setup way underpowered more than likely. You think Maple has lag issues now, imagine it's current hardware trying to do all the combined work that every player's PC does today.

While Lunia being all server sided does help with the hacking it does not stop everything. I played lunia from CB and it was all server sided then. It didn't stop people from PEing. I remember they used to do them quests where you deliver a letter to a stage and it was instant repeatable. The PEers would just stay in square and send the letter from there over and over. I will admit, CB and OB pretty much had no gameguard or whatever at all. But people can bypass that anyway.
On another note having everything server sided has a lot of down sides. And they can be extremely anoying down sides at times.

More on topic thought its funny that you should mention Lunia in a thread about trading seeing as Lunias trade setup used to be the worst around. People were so easily scammed without them doing anything.

Both replies are so interesting, I really wish you guys were in my server.
I am really aware of everything you both guys were saying. It was just a quick example of : whatever the problem is a solution could exist, question is the cost.
first I really I had a smile on Evilince reply about trade set up in Lunia, i totally agree with you, yet it was funny how they screwed that up.
Anyway for instance the solution they found for Lunia could definitely not be used for MS, as EOS said, it is totally impossible MS switch to a totally server side game, unless they would go to a real drastic redesign of all the software. And also a strict hash-code test can be totally bypassed : the guys we are fighting against are at least equally if not more smarter than GameGuard tech guys. I mean I'm a IT managing director in a software company and I am very well aware of this very issue because it's my daily work. Solution is very costly: weekly (at least) change heavily crypted processes to check client files/memory heap access/ etc.. It's impossible to drop to a 0% hacking possiblity but it's possible to lower it a lot more than it is right now : it's just that the Nexon business roadmap isn't hurt that much by this effect so why should they care and spend extra $ on it.


P.S. english isn't my mother tongue and for such a long post I probably did a few grammar and spelling mistakes, please spare me

I mean I'm a IT managing director in a software company and I am very well aware of this very issue because it's my daily work. Solution is very costly: weekly (at least) change heavily crypted processes to check client files/memory heap access/ etc..

Nexon could probably reduce 80% of the hacking just by changing their arbitrary encryption key every time they release a new version.

Very few people know how to backtrace to find the new key, and if those people hadn't just handed it out to the rest of the hacking community we wouldn't be as heavily inundated with them as we are now.

If that thing changed every time it'd mean every tool had to be redeveloped every release, rather than then using the same toys patch after patch.

Nexon could probably reduce 80% of the hacking just by changing their arbitrary encryption key every time they release a new version.

Very few people know how to backtrace to find the new key, and if those people hadn't just handed it out to the rest of the hacking community we wouldn't be as heavily inundated with them as we are now.

If that thing changed every time it'd mean every tool had to be redeveloped every release, rather than then using the same toys patch after patch.

Yeah, just change they key every week (server check). Just a small patch of 100kb per server check would cut 99% of the hackers...

I don't know why Nexon doesn't do this... It seems so easy and clear for me that that's the best hacker protection... I wonder about this for years now...

Make hackers drown in their key backtraces every week... It's so much work it doesnt even pay of to do it again and again and again...

No there are not any weird glitches going on with trades that I am aware of.

Nexon could probably reduce 80% of the hacking just by changing their arbitrary encryption key every time they release a new version.

Very few people know how to backtrace to find the new key, and if those people hadn't just handed it out to the rest of the hacking community we wouldn't be as heavily inundated with them as we are now.

If that thing changed every time it'd mean every tool had to be redeveloped every release, rather than then using the same toys patch after patch.

I've wondered about this too.

Then again it doesn't stop people who have the source code, and/or if they don't patch up the other exploits. It'd only slow the h4x0r community down, not stop them.

I've wondered about this too.

Then again it doesn't stop people who have the source code, and/or if they don't patch up the other exploits. It'd only slow the h4x0r community down, not stop them.

Having the source code from one version doesn't do you any good when the key changes, because the new key wouldn't be present in the old source.

Of course, if you were a good programmer, you'd write your program to be modular enough that it'd take all of three seconds to recompile your hack given the new encryption key. Unless I'm misunderstanding how MS hacks work.

Also, I've been wondering why they don't do a daily SC like other games like EVE do. Aside from the angry nerd rage that would occur from people with 2x EXP cards and FM spots.

Of course, if you were a good programmer, you'd write your program to be modular enough that it'd take all of three seconds to recompile your hack given the new encryption key. Unless I'm misunderstanding how MS hacks work.

Every program can be easily recompiled with a minor change like that.

The problem is the authors of those tools having time to find the key, or someone finding it for them, making sure they get it, and just having time to bother maintaining the tool month after month. Most tools are abandoned by their authors the day they're released or fairly soon afterwards.