Extra credit for discovering exploits: If an exploit can be succinctly, completely explained without a competition results, eg, an exploit is discovered without any attack, the discovering team recieves credit for the exploit. More complex exploits may require examples, such as history/output/results files, and competition setups which illustrate the exploit. Teams can also submit a robot which they observe or design to break a rule, as well as any setup information necessary. Such robots can be submitted with or without an exploit report as well as any additional material described below. Better bug reports will result in more credit, suggested solutions and code to solve the problem will be worth additional credit. I proposed the following point scale: 2 points: For submitting an exploit robot + setup information. 2 points: For submitting an exploit report which is sufficient for the teaching staff to begin debugging. 1~3 points: For exploit reports which give us an idea of where to start, eg, you've done some of the debugging for us. 1+ points: For submitting code or other solutions which corrects the issue. Figure 1 point for simple one-line fixes/checks or simple non-code solutions, to a maximum of around 5 points for large scale fixes.