[opensource-dev] Viewer blacklist to replace the TPV

[Boy Lane]

I don't know who you are Mr. Brandon Husbands, you are certainly not a viewer developer but a fly-by-night who want's to add some oil to the drama fire. It does not really matter.

I stated facts here, not flames.

Modularsytems is a "company" with a legal status we dont't know, created and owned by a person with permanently banned accounts due to ToS violations.

Modularsystems is registered as this entity in the viewer directory.

Modularsystems develops and uses malicious viewers, namely "Onyx", with several other malicious projects done by key developers such as Fractured, Phox, Skills or Cryo. All who had their accounts permanently banned for ToS violations.

I asked a legitimate question to LL, to repeat it once again: How can for repeated ToS violations permanently banned people just circumvent that ban by creating new accounts as many of the Emerald developers did? Is it money spent for SL that counts rather than ToS?

As you haven't read my posting, rather add irrelevant accusations in your own posting, Mr. Brandon Husband, that are supposedly to confuse the reader and discredit legitimate questions, lI can only conclude you are the troll here.

Boy





  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Brandon Husbands 
  To: Discrete Dreamscape 
  Cc: Boy Lane ; opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 3:55 PM
  Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer blacklist to replace the TPV


  I do not add much to the list.. But I will say... Mr lane, what ever your problem is with Emerald... You should probably let it go.  This blatant flaming and trolling does not help the open source community. Your actions and flames are actually a hindrance to the community as a whole. You see i say community as we typically work together to make things better etc. 

  It Seems you mostly wish to sabotage and wreck havoc. It is counter productive and plain rude. 
  SO i must request... Either take this offline directloy with the people you have a problem with or quit posting this crap as I do not want to have to read it. So as they say either *** or get off the pot.... So either become a active positive contributing member of this community or go away. I am quite fed up with the Trolls and will no longer personally tolerate it. So please go stroke your ego else where and lets get back to discussing code and things that actually matter to us besides your grievance against emerald.

  Dim.



  On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Discrete Dreamscape <discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com> wrote:

    I'd like to remark that the information you found is just the data of the ModularSystems website, and all of the other viewer directory listings look about the same as Emerald's. The actual real-life name(s) of people involved aren't required to be publicly viewable, but Linden Lab does have them. Also, consider the possibility that .sl was chosen as a domain because it could be an abbreviation for SecondLife. Cute, eh?


    I seriously doubt anyone with malicious intent is going to bother trying to register their viewer in the directory.



    On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Boy Lane <boy.lane at yahoo.com> wrote:

      We certainly should follow the bright example of Emerald / Modularsystems,
      where you Discrete are a member of. A pseudo company set up and owned
      by known banned griefer JCool aka who revived his banned account(s) under
      the names of Fractured Crystal/Fractured Modularsystems.

      Back to their registration. JCool set up Modularsystems. A mailbox company
      with the following contact details:

      http://modularsystems.sl/
      P.O. Box 5702
      West Columbia, South Carolina 29171-5702
      United States
      administrator at modularsystems.sl

      That is an untraceable anonymized entity without any name attached to it and
      unknown legal status, registered with a domain name in Sierra Leone, a
      country
      that does not even have a WHOIS.

      This information was used to register and self-certify Emerald in the Viewer
      Directory.

      As I as a legally uniformed hobby programmer without commercial interest can
      evaluate this situation and validity of the Emerald listing, it is meant to
      circumvent
      any means of the viewer directory to hold a developer accountable for their
      viewers. It is also meant to avoid any possible litigation from LL in case
      indeed
      some malicious code may be found in their viewer(s). Besides Emerald,
      Modularsystems
      also develops and uses a malicious viewer named "Onyx" that is in clear
      violation of
      ToS/TPV.

      So no, Discrete, all these things completely contradict your argument. As
      shown a
      listing in Lindens viewer directory doesn't add a single piece of safety or
      security. To
      look for a legitimate viewer the Alternate Viewer list in the community
      edited SL Wiki
      is a better place to, for the simple reason malicious clients may not easily
      slip in as
      this is possible with self-certification. A blacklist is a good thing and
      could at least
      complement Viewer Directory and Alternate Viewers list. But of course it
      would
      include most of the malicious viewer from the key developers behind
      Modularsystems
      which obviously you try to avoid.

      Additional question to Linden Lab: How can for repeated ToS violations
      permanently
      banned people just circumvent that ban by creating new accounts as many of
      the
      Emerald developers did? Is it money spent for SL that counts rather than
      ToS?

      Boy

      ----- Original Message ----- > Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 16:39:16 -0400
      > From: Discrete Dreamscape <discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com>
      > Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer blacklist to replace the TPV
      > directory ?
      > To: Tigro Spottystripes <TigroSpottystripes at gmail.com>
      > Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com
      > Message-ID:
      > <g2nc38195a91004291339p41f404edgfe05a593c813c6c1 at mail.gmail.com>
      > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
      >
      > This discussion seems to have been created with misleading intentions.
      >
      > Because some TPV creators don't want to reveal any personal information
      > about themselves, they can't be posted on the TPV directory, and because
      > of
      > this, it's understandable they might view the directory as unfair. But,
      > this
      > doesn't strike me as a valid reason to criticize the list.
      >
      > It's certainly valid to say that the viewers on the list are not
      > absolutely
      > trustworthy unless a full code audit is done, but even then, do you really
      > know that what's in the code is the same as what's in the binary? Isn't
      > there a limit to what LL can do, given a lack of resources to perform such
      > audits, especially when what you download requires trust that it's the
      > same
      > as what they've audited?
      >
      > But really, trust is supposed to be provided by the fact that the viewer
      > has
      > indeed registered using real-life contact information, because who would
      > give such a thing knowing they could be held liable if they indeed decided
      > to include malicious code? In general, there is no way to certify purity
      > here, you can only provide a level of trust as a guideline. You can't rely
      > on babysitting the users, because LL isn't going to compile every third
      > party's code and release the binaries themselves.
      >
      > In this regard, you may begin to argue that indeed, a blacklist would
      > better
      > serve users. I argue that this is exactly the opposite. You may be able to
      > pick out which viewers are explicitly untrusted, but you make no
      > statements
      > about the trustworthiness of any others. In this situation, a user is left
      > to choose between either a viewer which is in the grey about its status,
      > or
      > an official Linden viewer. This point is key, as far less warranty is
      > provided for users that they won't be banned for using a third party
      > viewer.
      > I suspect that in this case, many would simply give up and use the
      > official
      > client rather than risk their business, etc.
      >
      > If you want to provide a system where users can trust the clients they
      > use,
      > it seems like our current one is decent enough. In any case, a blacklist
      > doesn't appear to be any safer.
      >
      > Discrete
      >


      _______________________________________________
      Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
      http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
      Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges




    _______________________________________________
    Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
    http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
    Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges




  -- 
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  This email is a private and confidential communication. Any use of email may be subject to the laws and regulations of the United States. You may not Repost, Distribute nor reproduce any content of this message.
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100430/c6fb5de5/attachment.htm