Is escaping a grapple an action or an attack action?


Grappling

When you want to grab a creature or wrestle with it, you can use the Attack action to make a special melee attack, a grapple. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them. The target of your grapple must be no more than one size larger than you, and it must be within your reach.

Using at least one free hand, you try to seize the target by making a grapple check, a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target’s Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). If you succeed, you subject the target to the grappled condition (see appendix A). The condition specifies the things that end it, and you can release the target whenever you like (no action required).

Escaping a Grapple.

A grappled creature can use its action to escape. To do so, it must succeed on a Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check contested by your Strength (Athletics) check.

Moving a Grappled Creature.

When you move, you can drag or carry the grappled creature with you, but your speed is halved, unless the creature is two or more sizes smaller than you.

Is escaping a grapple a single attack (part of the attack action) or a separate action?

It says very clearly that while attacking, if a player can grapple someone with an attack action, and if they have multiple attacks with the Attack action, this [grappling] attack replaces one of them. Shouldn’t it be the case that escaping a grapple could also be one of those "multiple attacks?" I can’t see the distinction with ruling it otherwise.

Is escaping a concept in CS?

I understand "escaping data" as making an exception when matching data; for example, if a program can’t match data wrapped in single and/or double quotes without an exception, than we make an exception, "escaping" such characters to be matched.

Is escaping a concept in CS?
Is it "part of how any computer would work" or just a technical implementation in human-developed programming languages?

Is the phrase “within reach” equivalent to “within 5 feet” when it comes to escaping from a net?

I was reading the about the Net item whose description states:

A creature can use its action to make a DC 10 Strength check, freeing itself or another creature within its reach on a success.

And was unsure if anything ever has a reach larger than 5 feet.

I tried to check the section on “Melee Attacks”:

Most creatures have a 5-foot reach and can thus attack targets within 5 feet of them when making a melee attack. Certain creatures (typically those larger than Medium) have melee attacks with a greater reach than 5 feet, as noted in their descriptions.

But it does not actually say that their reach is increased, just that some attacks of theirs have greater reach.
I thought the Reach weapon property could help but it states:

This weapon adds 5 feet to your reach when you attack with it, as well as when determining your reach for opportunity attacks with it.

It only increases your reach for two specific things, attacks using it and the reach for opportunity attacks.

As far as I could find your reach is five feet unless you are making an (opportunity) attack, so is there any time where the Net (and also hunting traps and quicksand) having the phrase “within reach” would be different from the phrase “within 5 feet”?

Strahd and escaping to Sigil [duplicate]

This question already has an answer here:

  • How can I escape Ravenloft in spite of the dark powers? 1 answer

So my Curse of Strahd party is a silver dragonborn fighter, a high elf cleric and a tiefling druid. He brought the fighter to Barovia because he’s the last living descendant of Argynvost and he wants to wipe out the bloodline completely, and he brought the cleric because [reasons].

Now I’ve had an idea for the druid, but I’m not sure if I can make it work. As part of her backstory, she’s been travelling the planes trying to find a cure for the curse that befell her homeland (which we’ve decided is Flotsam from the Dragonlance universe, since it’s not out of the question that they’d have some kind of “devil’s quarter” there for wayward Tieflings). On one of her journeys she got lost in a demiplane, where she attracted the attention of the Lady of Pain due to her having a pretty unique tail, and the Lady sent an emissary to offer her passage to and a key for Sigil in exchange for half the tail, which she accepted.

Obviously the key won’t work in Barovia due to the rules on getting to other planes, which is why Strahd can’t leave as well (and the druid tried to use it after realising she’d been transported and it didn’t work), but obviously if he could he’d want to in order to escape his endless torment. So I hit upon the idea that the reason he brought the druid to his realm was to offer to restore her ruined wings in exchange for her key (whether he can do this or not or even intends to is a subject for another session) but my question is: is there anything in the 5e RAW that would enable Strahd to make use of a Sigil key to escape Barovia if he had one? I mean DM fiat means I could just say it works, but I’d like to have a way to justify him doing this if that’s the way the campaign ends up going (at which point Strahd would escape and start terrorising other planes if they don’t go after him).

TL;DR: Could Strahd do anything with a key to Sigil that would allow him to escape Barovia?

Escaping chars in .htaccess

I can’t find proper list (or you need to be registered to some sort of forum or not clear list) of which chars should be escaped in .htaccess file. I found that dots don’t need to be escaped – but for me it’s irracional because they have meaning in “regex”.

For example this rewrite…

RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{REQUEST_METHOD} POST RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} /index.php\/component\/users\/\?task=registration.register [NC] RewriteRule .* - [F,L] 

It has escaped all slashes which are not “beginning” but still that POST “pass through”

My question – does anyone have list which chars should be escaped?

Can I disable “Allow double escaping” on a SharePoint web site?

We’re working on hardening our SharePoint server, and STIG V-76825 IISW-SI-000229 mandates that “Double encoded URL requests must be prohibited by any IIS 8.5 website”. Basically, editing the Request Filtering feature settings in IIS and unchecking the Allow double escaping checkbox.

Is this going to limit any SharePoint operations, considering the source parameter is escaped and used in a lot of operations? Or things like document names?

I’ve done a little testing, but I don’t have a way to test every possible SharePoint url, and I haven’t found a definitive answer searching the internet yet. If we need to leave it checked, I have to have some good documentation as to why.

SQL Injection Escaping Challenge Security Shepherd

I am using Security Shepherd as a training tool and I am now in challenge SQL Injection Escaping Challenge. The challenge is as it can be seen below: enter image description here

When I makae a query just like the one above (just with different table names) in a local database in MySql it works just fine (I am making the assumption that Shepherd uses Mysql in this challenge since it is the only type of DBMS I have faced until now).
Any idea why the above query might not work as a SQL injection??

The query being used by the backend as mentioned in the hint of the challenge is:
SELECT * FROM customers WHERE customerId="1" OR "1"="1"; The application is escaping any ' by making it \'as a protection against SQL injection. It does not change the ".

Is escaping from a cage-shaped Forcecage really as ridiculously easy as it seems?

The spell Forcecage allows you to create a prison in the shape of either a cage with bars, or a closed box.

Escaping the Forcecage is (obviously) meant to be difficult:

A creature inside the cage can’t leave it by nonmagical means. If the creature tries to use teleportation or interplanar travel to leave the cage, it must first make a Charisma saving throw. On a success, the creature can use that magic to exit the cage. On a failure, the creature can’t exit the cage and wastes the use of the spell or effect. The cage also extends into the Ethereal Plane, blocking ethereal travel.

However, if you choose the cage shape, it is ridiculously easy to escape, using one of the following means:

  • Wildshape into an form that can squeeze through 1/2 inch gaps
  • Polymorph, True Polymorph, Mass Polymorph, Shapechange or Animal Shapes, similar to Wildshape
  • Gaseous Form, can squeeze through any gap. Maybe also Wind Walk, but that spell doesn’t explicitly mention being able to squeeze through gaps.
  • Antimagic Field: Forcecage is only immune to Dispel Magic, not Antimagic Field. Would also work on a box-shaped Forcecage.
  • Disintegrate, which can destroy creations of magical force. Would also work on a box-shaped Forcecage.
  • Casting Misty Step a bunch of times, since it’s just a 2nd-level-spell and you’re likely to suceed on the Charisma save eventually.

So, in the end, Forcecage with its cage shape seems like it’s most likely a waste when used on a caster, especially a druid.

Is escaping from it really as ridiculously easy as it seems? Or am I missing something?

Import products not escaping forward slash in category

I’m trying to import products into v2.2.7 but apparently this has been a problem since 2016 and has not been resolved until v2.3.x.

When importing to magento, some categories are like Socks/types a / b. When i import without changing anything, the structure is like the following:

Socks `-- types a     `--  b 

If i use ascii, i end up with the right text visually in the backend, but my URL strings all are ascii and the back-end clean URL isn’t correct using / and products that should be nested under it do not get nested appropriately.

Socks `-- types a / b 

If I upload category looking like this Socks/types a \/ b, I end up with the following:

Socks `-- types a \     `--  b 

The ascii and the escape option are discussed in an issue here. Escaping could be the perfect solution for import because I could easily handle the hundreds of records.

The solution suggested in this thread is the following:

// In \Magento\CatalogImportExport\Model\Import\Product\Category there is a function upsertCategory.  protected function upsertCategory($  categoryPath) {     if (!isset($  this->categories[$  categoryPath])) {         $  pathParts = explode(self::DELIMITER_CATEGORY, $  categoryPath);         $  parentId = \Magento\Catalog\Model\Category::TREE_ROOT_ID;         $  path = '';          foreach ($  pathParts as $  pathPart) {             $  path .= $  pathPart;             if (!isset($  this->categories[$  path])) {                 $  this->categories[$  path] = $  this->createCategory($  pathPart, $  parentId);             }             $  parentId = $  this->categories[$  path];             $  path .= self::DELIMITER_CATEGORY;         }     }      return $  this->categories[$  categoryPath]; } 

However, i’m new to magento and don’t see \Magento\CatalogImportExport in the directory structure. I looked in vendor and don’t see CatalogImportExport there either.

I have a script that can replace all the / with \/. However, magento is not escaping the \/. The desired directory structure when importing Socks/types a \/ b is:

Socks `-- types a / b 

Does anyone know how I can make this work in v2.2.x or especially v2.2.7?