While I understand the issue that people are banning based solely on
viewer ID, I don't see this as being a security issue. The client is
NOT being hacked, the information is just not as easy to access as it
is for a web browser.
I see the info bring gathered as nothing more than the user agent
On 2010-05-02, at 17:01, Skills Hak wrote:
The people with bad reviews are mostly copybotters who have been
banned by the system and are coming up with crazy quicktime hack
theories, Dekadance Mint isn't even in search any more.
You could eliminate the crazy quicktime hack theories if you
This is clearly a security hole that is being exploited, so it should be fixed.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
My mistake. I was under the impression that anything not on the list
wasn't supposed to be able to get on agni. I must have read it wrong.
--GC
On 05/01/2010 09:50 PM, Maya Remblai wrote:
Glen Canaday wrote:
[14:57] GC Continental: anything not on the TPV list as of yesterday
can't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
according to Skill LL knows how the system works and has not taken any
measures to prevent it, which indicates they are ok with it
On 1/5/2010 18:50, Bryon Ruxton wrote:
Is that thing really exploiting a quicktime hack?
I.e. Trying to protect
as far as i can tell the detection is done by loading a url on the client.
the browser in the client loads the url which is a server side script that
rips apart the header of the post and searches for a certain part which
happens to be the name of the client. if the name of the client
The only way to reliably detect a client is if the client sends an MD5
hash of the executable to the login server, and that function was
removed ages ago from the login process due to ease of spoofing.
Requiring a unique login channel requires manual intervention to change
the login channel from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
AFAIK only LL (and someone intercepting network communications) knows
what channel some client is using
On 2/5/2010 18:42, Rob Nelson wrote:
The only way to reliably detect a client is if the client sends an MD5
hash of the executable to the
Um, please don't confuse this incident with CDS which doesn't ban clients
arbitrarily, this seems to be about a similar system of a more
unscrupulous competitor. There isn't even a copybot client with
Snowglobe 2.0.0
() (CommunityDeveloper) as base we are aware of, so not sure why
zFire Xue is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
From that chat log it seems the banning system in question (not CDS)
uses heuristics, it banned that person for using a rare client, unless
i've misunderstood what was said there.
On 2/5/2010 19:01, Skills Hak wrote:
Um, please don't confuse this
Tigro Spottystripes schrieb:
AFAIK only LL (and someone intercepting network communications) knows
what channel some client is using
Yes and no - it is also transmitted with the useragent of the build-in
webbrowser.
Armin
___
Policies and
then what exactly does cds ban? if no clients? because as long as you only
use emerald or second life then you wont get banned by cds. if you start
dabbling on other clients you get banned. so what does cds ban if no
clients?
On Sun, 02 May 2010 19:01:19 -0300, Skills Hak
That's me on the list. You go in Snowglobe V2? My partner was also there
in Emerald and did not get banned - that's why I was asking about
client-based ban (and hence why I even brought it up on this list, even
though it's only on topic in a very cursory way).
--GC
On 05/01/2010 12:45 AM,
I don't know if this store is (badly) detecting client versions/channels
through the media plugins' user agent strings, or if it's just that I didn't
move enough for their taste after teleporting. I went there with my test alt,
using Snowglobe 2.0.0 () Apr 22 2010 00:11:09
Is that thing really exploiting a quicktime hack?
I.e. Trying to protect Computer Crimes Law by violating the very same laws.
If so, isn't that against the LL TOS and shouldn't it be taken down by LL?
The below reviews have me raising eyebrows...
Well OSS devs, be prepared to be banned by anyone using the redzone
thing even when using unpatched LL svn. Sorry to spam, but this type of
attitude is spreading, and I thought that *EVERYONE* on this list best know.
[14:54] zFire Xue: Your comming up as Community Developer
[14:55] zFire Xue:
Me too, but I don't think it's against TOS. A sim owner can do what a
sim owner wants, and if it's to trust client/copybot detection to an
inworld device they didn't make themselves, that's not against the rules
afaik. Of course, I'm completely unaware of any method that's not going
to result
On 2010-05-01, at 17:53, Glen Canaday wrote:
Me too, but I don't think it's against TOS. A sim owner can do what a
sim owner wants, and if it's to trust client/copybot detection to an
inworld device they didn't make themselves, that's not against the
rules
afaik. Of course, I'm completely
Glen Canaday wrote:
[14:57] GC Continental: anything not on the TPV list as of yesterday
can't connect to the grid at all. This one does.
Just wanted to point out, that isn't true. The TPV list is merely for
advertisement, and an unlisted viewer can still connect. Cool SL and
Rainbow, for
I went there. I saw a GC Continental was on the ban list for both
of the sims. That was the closest I could find to you.
I am not aware of there being any autobanners that ban by client that
any landowner or sim owner can use. I don't know of any way to
detect via script or estate or land
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
there is Skill's CDS system
On 1/5/2010 01:45, Andromeda Quonset wrote:
I went there. I saw a GC Continental was on the ban list for both
of the sims. That was the closest I could find to you.
I am not aware of there being any autobanners
21 matches
Mail list logo
