Fandom

ROBLOX Wikia

Exploit

12,565pages on
this wiki
Add New Page
Talk2 Share

Exploit

WARNING: Putting subjects that are about exploiting they will be fixed

During the history of ROBLOX, many exploits were found, disseminated, and abused by ROBLOX users. Most of those were, over the course of development, fixed by the ROBLOX developers. New exploits have formed, and a conspiracy suggests that Vault 8166 hackers may be linked to the creation of many exploits out there.

There is no solution to completely eliminate exploits on ROBLOX. However, many advances towards reducing exploiting have been attempted.

One most notable client, RC7 or rc7 or rc7 or rc7 rc7 or rc7 rewrite has been around for quite some time, mostly found on v3rmillion or vermillion, then cracked which is rat. It was found out that the creator of RC7 King Jayden, kicked out of his house then he come back. RC7 is not Patched and its come out a new thing call Rc7 Rewrite kids.

Anothers lv7 exploit just coming out name INTRIGA[skidded fo elysian],Stella,Cerberus,Elysian,QTX[Rat!!!] and more will be coming soon.

However, a client called Spare Reborn is becoming more popular each week, as old games like The Underground War by stickmasterluke are playgrounds for exploiters who have it, which forces some game creators to use FilteringEnabled or FE, a script that only exploiters can see their damage, but others can't and won't be affected by the damage. You cannot simply just insert the script, you need to do work with your game so it'll be the same.

Rumors have circulated on ROBLOX that suggest that the "hackers" who accessed John Doe's account in 2016 will return to ROBLOX on March 18, 2017 and "hack" all accounts that are logged in at that time. ROBLOX has addressed on previous occasions that it is impossible for someone to hack into a ROBLOX account; what is more likely to occur is an account being passguessed (due to the player having an easy-to-guess password) or their login information being shared on phishing websites .

Lua bytecode

When Lua runs programs, the Lua virtual machine compiles code to Lua bytecode before it is interpreted. This process is irreversible without artifacts (via decompilation), and thus was frequently used for Code Obfuscation.

Lua bytecode does not have the same structure as Lua and allows, by unconventional means, manipulation of the stack and other things that are not possible in normal Lua programming. It is possible, though difficult, to write Lua assembly code manually and to assemble it into Lua bytecode. The ROBLOX process can load Lua code and Lua bytecode through use of its loadstring function.

It has been proposed on the Lua mailing list that direct stack manipulation could be used to access the environment of other functions during their execution and, therefore, to steal values from these functions (including C functions that Lua has access to), something which is not possible in pure Lua.

The ROBLOX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function that allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal values from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to become capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.

This resulted in the removal of bytecode from ROBLOX and the ability to use it with the loadstring function.[2] Despite common belief, this exploit was unrelated to a Direct Dynamic Library (DLL) exploit in the same time period. The removal of bytecode had no other side effect than rendering code obfuscation impossible without other means.

When Lua runs programs, the Lua virtual machine compiles code to Lua bytecode before it is interpreted. This process is irreversible without artifacts (via decompilation), and thus was frequently used for Code Obfuscation.

Lua bytecode does not have the same structure as Lua and allows, by unconventional means, manipulation of the stack and other things that are not possible in normal Lua programming. It is possible, though difficult, to write Lua assembly code manually and to assemble it into Lua bytecode. The ROBLOX process can load Lua code and Lua bytecode through use of its loadstring function.

It has been proposed on the Lua mailing list that direct stack manipulation could be used to access the environment of other functions during their execution and, therefore, to steal values from these functions (including C functions that Lua has access to), something which is not possible in pure Lua.

The ROBLOX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function that allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal values from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to become capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.

This resulted in the removal of bytecode from ROBLOX and the ability to use it with the loadstring function.[2] Despite common belief, this exploit was unrelated to a Direct Dynamic Library (DLL) exploit in the same time period. The removal of bytecode had no other side effect than rendering code obfuscation impossible without other means.

When Lua runs programs, the Lua virtual machine compiles code to Lua bytecode before it is interpreted. This process is irreversible without artifacts (via decompilation), and thus was frequently used for Code Obfuscation.

Lua bytecode does not have the same structure as Lua and allows, by unconventional means, manipulation of the stack and other things that are not possible in normal Lua programming. It is possible, though difficult, to write Lua assembly code manually and to assemble it into Lua bytecode. The ROBLOX process can load Lua code and Lua bytecode through use of its loadstring function.

It has been proposed on the Lua mailing list that direct stack manipulation could be used to access the environment of other functions during their execution and, therefore, to steal values from these functions (including C functions that Lua has access to), something which is not possible in pure Lua.

The ROBLOX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function that allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal values from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to become capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.

This resulted in the removal of bytecode from ROBLOX and the ability to use it with the loadstring function.[2] Despite common belief, this exploit was unrelated to a Direct Dynamic Library (DLL) exploit in the same time period. The removal of bytecode had no other side effect than rendering code obfuscation impossible without other means.

When Lua runs programs, the Lua virtual machine compiles code to Lua bytecode before it is interpreted. This process is irreversible without artifacts (via decompilation), and thus was frequently used for Code Obfuscation.

Lua bytecode does not have the same structure as Lua and allows, by unconventional means, manipulation of the stack and other things that are not possible in normal Lua programming. It is possible, though difficult, to write Lua assembly code manually and to assemble it into Lua bytecode. The ROBLOX process can load Lua code and Lua bytecode through use of its loadstring function. load string is borkem for rc7.

It has been proposed on the Lua mailing list that direct stack manipulation could be used to access the environment of other functions during their execution and, therefore, to steal values from these functions (including C functions that Lua has access to), something which is not possible in pure Lua.

The ROBLOX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function that allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal values from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to become capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.When Lua runs programs, the Lua virtual machine compiles code to Lua bytecode before it is interpreted. This process is irreversible without artifacts (via decompilation), and thus was frequently used for Code Obfuscation.

Lua bytecode does not have the same structure as Lua and allows, by unconventional means, manipulation of the stack and other things that are not possible in normal Lua programming. It is possible, though difficult, to write Lua assembly code manually and to assemble it into Lua bytecode. The ROBLOX process can load Lua code and Lua bytecode through use of its loadstring function.

It has been proposed on the Lua mailing list that direct stack manipulation could be used to access the environment of other functions during their execution and, therefore, to steal values from these functions (including C functions that Lua has access to), something which is not possible in pure Lua.

The ROBLOX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function that allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal values from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to becThe ROBLOX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function that allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal valThe ROBLThe ROBLOX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function tThe ROBLOX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function that allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal values from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to become capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.hat allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal values from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to become capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.OX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function that allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal values from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to become capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.ues from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to become capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.The ROBLOX user NecroBumpist proved the idea to be true and possible.[1] Using Lua bytecode, he created a function that allowed a script to steal values from other functions, including C functions. This made it possible to steal values from ROBLOX's API's, but months passed until someone found a way to use this bug to modify the global environment and to become capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.ome capable to make the core scripts and the join script execute any Lua code in a game server.

This resulted in the removal of bytecode from ROBLOX and the ability to use it with the loadstring function.[2] Despite common belief, this exploit was unrelated to a Direct Dynamic Library (DLL) exploit in the same time period. The removal of bytecode had no other side effect than rendering code obfuscation impossible without other means.

This resulted in the removal of bytecode from ROBLOX and the ability to use it with the loadstring function.[2] Despite common belief, this exploit was unrelated to a Direct Dynamic Library (DLL) exploit in the same time period. The removal of bytecode had no other side effect than rendering code obfuscation impossible without other means.

Please note that lots of theories about hackers are not real.

See also

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 Necro's Magical Bytecode Exploits, ROBLOX forums, http://www.roblox.com/Forum/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=57817090
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 John Shedletsky, Bye Bye Bytecode, ROBLOX Blog, http://blog.roblox.com/2012/08/bye-bye-bytecode

Start a Discussion Discussions about Exploit

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.