Sun, 26 June 2016, 06:30 UTC — Sun, 26 June 2016, 13:00 UTC 



Format: Attack-Defense Attack-Defense

Official URL:

Future weight: 5.00 

Rating weight: 5.00 

Event organizers 

no logo


7 teams total

PlaceTeamCTF pointsRating points
1 dcua 10.00010.000
2 Invulnerable 4.9434.972
3 Team Information Offensive 4.4943.914
4 Magic Hat 4.1033.302
5 Super Raxacoricofallapatorius Pancakes 3.5462.773
6 Corrupted 1.0511.359
7 Espacio 0.0150.361
PharisaeusJune 27, 2016, 8:28 a.m.

This event should have 0p. It was NEVER announced so only selected teams who knew could play. Surely accidentally only Russian and Ukrainian teams... There is even no scoreboard on the page, only link to pastebin. If I were more suspicious I would think the event never even took place...

solarwindJune 27, 2016, 2:19 p.m.

Oh come on, stop trolling. Folks organized online attack-defense ctf, they should be encouraged in this activity and kindly asked to do so next year too. CTF itself is adequate, runs for 3 years.
As far as I know description was submitted 10 days before event, but was not added because of technical reasons not connected to event itself.

PharisaeusJune 27, 2016, 4:32 p.m.

I was just joking that the event was fake ;) And I'm not trying to discourage anyone from organizing a CTF. Nevertheless it is simply not fair to award global rating points for a CTF which was inaccessible for most teams. For the same reason HighSchool CTFs and closed, invite-only CTFs all have 0p (Belluminar 2016 has 0p even though it was for sure a high quality CTF). From what I remember for similar reasons last year's Volga Finals ( ) got scored 0p. I can't see how this is any different.

solarwindJune 27, 2016, 6:33 p.m.

It is open for all online attack-defense ctf, and is organized for several years . I saw announce on , reddit securityCTF is good enough source in case of delay of ctftime event announce.

As far as I see you are not joking, but trying to manipulate rating weight -- upvoting indian bullshit ctfs and downvothing good one where you didn't played. You can ofcourse do that, but I can ensure you it is useless in long run and will not help you become world #1 team.

PharisaeusJune 27, 2016, 7:16 p.m.

I was under the impression that CTFtime ranking is about CTFtime events, not every possible IT-sec competition going on. There are a lot of those and keeping track of all of them (because magically one can appear on CTFtime afterwards) is a bit of a problem.

I'm not trying to manipulate anything. I would like to know what are the scoring rules if one CTF gets 0p for being inaccessible for other teams, and another just as inaccessible gets points.
I don't want to "downvote a good CTF I didn't play". I would like to have clear rules where everyone has equal chances.

As for our place in the final ranking - don't worry about us, the season is not over yet ;)

solarwindJune 27, 2016, 9:28 p.m.

It is open team-based competition, no quals or invitations.
Come on, stop lying about you are not trying to manipulate rating. I see you are voting against rating weight of Belluminar CTF which was amazing, and upvoting Backdoor and BreakIn CTFs which are high-school level shit this year.
About your place -- good luck! Try competing PPP team in CTFs, not in vote manipulation!

PharisaeusJune 27, 2016, 11:37 p.m.

Of course I'm against scoring Belluminar. For the same reason as here -> it's unfair to award points for something that was inaccessible for majority of teams. It makes no difference if a CTF was open and required no invitations officially, since it was not in the schedule and therefore in reality it required an "invitation" in form of being told it's there and being told it will appear on CTFtime.
We're competing in CTFs with PPP, with you and with many other teams all the time, so I fail to see what you mean by "try competing". We're trying all the time.

solarwindJune 28, 2016, 6:47 a.m.

This particular CTF was accessible (announce a week ago on reddit), and Belluminar has invitations based on previous team performance. The fact that you are not qualified, or didn't wanted to participate like in this case is not making CTF worse.
Your activity in vote manipulation is much higher than really playing CTFs, thats why try competing against others on CTFs, not in comments here.

PharisaeusJune 28, 2016, 7:24 a.m.

Announce on reddit != announce on CTFtime. End of story.
Belluminar invitations were biased and impartial since they invited teams 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 13, 14, 22, 26, 36. On top of that scoring event like this makes it harder for a "new" team to get higher in ranking, since those are "bonus" points for a couple of "old" teams.

I have no power to manipulate anything, unless "voting differently than dcua" is automatically considered "vote manipulation" :) Apparently this is a new term for you, but it's called "freedom of speech". I simply express how I feel about this, but it's up to CTFtime admin to decide what to do with this.

solarwindJune 28, 2016, 8:28 a.m.

Announcement to CTFtime was send, but didn't published from technical reasons not related to CTF itself. Reddit is second popular public source of CTF announcements.
Belluminar invited teams for their overal performance. For some CTFs orgs may decide that "new" team should prove that they are qualified enough by playing CTFs, not writing comments on CTFtime.
LOL, you are telling me almost exact my words about speech and voting that you were opposing in Pwn2Win CTF. Now you are for "free speech" and "voting differently" -- what happened? Speech limit is not helping to downvote this CTF?

PharisaeusJune 28, 2016, 9:58 a.m.

I was for freedom of speech/vote then and I am still. I didn't agree with how you voted and freedom of speech allowed me to express that. I don't agree with score here and I express that. This is how it works.
In fact I think it's actually very good that you can vote and comment, at least everyone can see what kind of person you are. Especially how nicely you try to offend us every comment here. But it's fine, if you need to boost your ego this way, it's your problem :)

solarwindJune 28, 2016, 4:46 p.m.

LOL, freedom of speech and vote is not connected to discussion in any way. The point was about appreciation of good work of this and Belluminar CTF organizers, which you are trying to mix with shit only because you didn't scored there. This discussion is also about public shaming of voting manipultion, which you actively promoting -- this is wrong, and you should feel bad.

cr019283June 28, 2016, 10:33 p.m.

@solarwind - there is no need for a prolonged discussions. We would simply appreciate some announcement of the event from the organizers so we could decide whether we want to join and play or not.

If it was a closed party; or it wasn't not announced on ctftime; or it was announced after it's over, in most cases it shouldn't be scored on ctftime. I think it's a fair expectation. I guess it wasn't organized overnight and there was some time to make a proper announcement.

I also don't see how the community here or even organizers can benefit from this event if there is only a raw list of teams and points were given without any voting, participants comments or even writeups...
From your description it was something interesting, well-organized and worth attending. So I would be definitely interested in reading at least some writeup to get some more info about it.


solarwindJune 29, 2016, 5:53 a.m.

Announcement was here . I don't have writeups, but here are network map and vulnimage
Community benefit from it because this is new open online attack-defense ctf of ructfe style. There are only 3 ctfs of such kind per year, compared to >100 jeopardy. They are cool to play, but are very hard to organize.
Orgs are benefiting from assigning rating weight to this event because it shows that their work is really appreciated and should be continued next year. 5.0 points doesn't change anything in global rating, but it is clear indication that people are grateful for good work.
First comment in this thread translated from official language is saying "you are fake, your ctf is shit and don't deserve anything". This is not true, although there are jerks among current top teams, most are respectful, friendly and value efforts of others.

Sign in to comment.