[opensource-dev] Viewer blacklist to replace the TPV

Boy Lane boy.lane at yahoo.com
Fri Apr 30 01:12:16 PDT 2010

Sorry, seems I have to correct myself. Mr. Brandon Husbands seems to be Dimentox Travanti. Creator of the "Toxic Viewer". A project that violates GPL by not providing sources as well as distributing non-redistributable components such as the Vivox voice packages.

This adds very well to your credibility Mr. Brandon Husbands :).

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Boy Lane 
  To: Brandon Husbands ; Discrete Dreamscape 
  Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 3:57 PM
  Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer blacklist to replace the TPV

  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.


    ----- 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.


    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:

        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
        that does not even have a WHOIS.

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

        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
        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
        some malicious code may be found in their viewer(s). Besides Emerald,
        also develops and uses a malicious viewer named "Onyx" that is in clear
        violation of

        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
        include most of the malicious viewer from the key developers behind
        which obviously you try to avoid.

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


        ----- 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:
        Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

      Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
      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/20100430/4d88bbd4/attachment-0001.htm 

More information about the opensource-dev mailing list