"reasonable expectation of privacy"

I was just about to ask why we were still feeding it! Damn, they're like stray cats! Once you start feeding one, they never go away!

yet here you are, replying once again LOL

oh and my posts to brenda were not about the subject at all, I figured that subject was dead and done, so was having some fun...

*shrug*

Heh. If I were sentenced to writing C#, I'd spend a lot more time in both SL and the Forums. But I certainly wouldn't spend it listening to Voice from Ahern--or anywhere else, for that matter.

There's just got to be something more going on here. Perhaps others have figured out the intended end-game, but I'm still at a loss. Maybe it has to do with trying to somehow hack open the Vivox video capabilities for use in-world; at least I can imagine how that might be profitable for resale to RL businesses or SL escorts or something. But I can't imagine Vivox would leave that possibility open, so it's not a sensible explanation.

On the other hand, whatever the real intent, one can imagine that the OP's arrangement with LL requires him to be circumspect in answering questions here. The problem with that, though: Why open the discussion in the first place, if one knew one couldn't discuss the matter? The same contradiction applies if the circumspection is due to proprietary "trade secrets," or really any reason that comes to mind.

This thread nonetheless serves as a reminder that anything said in-world--chat, IM, public or private voice--is subject to rebroadcast outside the SL service, with LL apparently unwilling to do anything about it. In theory, they could sanction the account responsible for that rebroadcasting, but it seems they won't. The "privacy" assured in the ToS appears to restrict communications only in-world and in these Forums, the only media explicitly mentioned in the Community Standards.

This thread also serves as a reminder that while most people - in both the real world and in virtual world - who will do what's ethically correct without explicit guidance from the "law of the land", there's always a few who will do whatever they can get away with without regard for anyone else just because they can.

It's being looked into more now and likely will be reclassified...

Since the trick bypasses all land security functions, since Vivox's software does not check for them relying on the SL client to handle issue with bans and the like.

So this trick can be used to bypass all reasonable expectations of privacy, since you can use it to listen into a localized voice feed in a private sim/lot that has the person listed as forbidden to enter.

It also mean a griefer/creep can use it and banning them in the land access list does not kick them out of the active speakers because there is no sl client/avatar to remove from the parcel.

It can work in 2 way mode as well.

So thanks for bringing this up for all of SL's attention... now get ready for them to fix it post haste since this little exploit can mean the end of voice in sl if there is no way for people to expect any privacy or prevent voice attacks using the tools available to them.

regarding this "trick":
once you are banned from a sim, you cant enter the sim to get connected to the spatial chat, "trick" or no "trick".
if you are already there and get banned, your spatial voice will still be there, until the sim owner ticks voice off and back on.
if you are banned from a parcel, whether you do this "trick" or not, you will still be able to hear spatial voice from the banned parcel on an unbanned parcel nearby the banned parcel unless the banned parcel or unbanned parcel has "use a private spatial channel" ticked.

Well I do know my home is set to private spatial channel, and was able to use the trick to set up a two way with an avatar on the banned list.

Your trick may not be the same as the one I was using, but yours brought up the testing and the results now deal with the fallout of bringing an exploit to light by using it in an unethical manner

i dont know what to tell you then, call the FBI. lol

What types of communications it applies to is arguable but it's always been the case that LL won't do anything about chat logs posted outside of their domain that's why Prok has fodder for her blog and one of the reasons why SLUniverse is such a popular forum, people can quote and take out of context all they want with only their reputation at stake and their account intact.

I know it's a stupid question but all of you (including Metadata) know how crazy it is to argue ethics based on real world principles in an entirely virtual world where the only thing real is the person at the keyboard and even that isn't guaranteed only assumed?

Tell that to those filing taxes on their earned income from SL


SL isn't a game per se when you consider the fact it's real money, real laws, and more involved.

Thing is he this exploit needs to be fixed, either by a simple flag requiring an avatar to be present with the sl client running... verified through LL servers so there is no issues of a hidden avatar or no avatar providing a false sensation of security. Especially when there are ways to use the trick for violating the terms of service and the community standards.

It wasn't much money but I was one of those people although considering that getting audited would probably be easier than the trouble it takes to actually put it in as extra income I wonder why I even bothered.

In terms of them fixing it, I agree that it should be changed but they need to do it smartly.

!) Give owners a flag to allow a public listen stream, that would give the parcel owner or whoever an assigned url that anyone could hook into, although a static url is best what would probably be a different url generated each time this feature is switched on in which case the url would immediately be deactived when the feature is deactivated, to prevent people exploiting the recurrence of any URL all inactive urls would return a 404 error and there would be a dead time before a url could be reused. For generating a url use a 10 string random alphanumeric combo, that would give plenty of possibilities with minimal reuse.

2) Setup a system for nonpublic streams, tie this system to a user by user basis so only one connection on any stream and each stream would be assigned by the landowner to an avatar name. It would also be needed for there to be a UI for this so that streams could be deactivated and stream rights revoked immediately as needed.

3) Set all linden land including infohubs to public with publicly available URLS, in addition to this publish clear notification that you do not have a right to privacy in these locations. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to see and hear voice and text chat on Linden land and on non resident land its' already understood that not using IM equals no privacy.

There are probably alot more than just SL users using Vivox (http://www.vivox.com/partners.html) but to get a voice conference URI you have to stand on the parcel/region and request it from the sim... the only problem I see with it is that a parcel owner isn't even given moderator privileges in the voice conference... yet

i agree, the option exists for a moderator, but it has not been implemented.
mainland/estate sims with different parcels use the same public spatial channel, there is no way to have a moderator for a public spatial channel except on a private spatial channel for each parcel.
however, the estate owner should have moderator privileges over the public spatial channel.