Permissions change on wear?!? (O.o)

Okay, I now have two items that will do this. One is a hair and another is an outfit I just got today. (>_<

In both cases, the prim attachments are (Modify) (Copy) (No-Transfer) ... Making for rather good attachments. Quite normal, right? (^_^)

Then, I wear it... And the perms change. Now it's (No-Modify) (No-Copy) (Transfer) ... The absolute oppisite perms. (O.o)

I rez it... Same story. Add to that, I can take it and have a copy in my inventory that's no-mod/no-copy. (>_<

Okay, I just tested it out... Since the original is no-transfer, I took back the no-copy rezzed version and gave it to someone, it transfered. Though, I can't copy it. But! I can make copies of the original transfer version. (^_^)

The main problem is when I wear it. Since, when wearing it I get no-mod permissions, I can't size it to my avatar. (T_T)

Add to that, the store owner is taking a break from SL. (T_T)

BLARGH!!!! (>_<

I WANT to wear the outfit... The perms are all just right in my inventory... But, once I put the prims on, I can't touch them. (._.)

Jira? Support? Ticket? What do I do? (T_T)

O.o

Could this be weird stuff with perms not working until it gets to the next owner? If you right-click and do Properties when they're in inventory, what's the Next Owner perms set to?

Sounds like the creator set the next owner permissions on the prim while it was in inventory rather than when it was actually rezzed which can lead to oddness like this.

Before rezzing on the left. After on the right. (>_<



One thing I noticed is that it only affects the attachments that use sculpted bows. It may be that they used a pre-fab bow or something of the sort that wonked up permissions. (>_<

I had that once with a pair of freebie earrings with copy/mod/notrans permissions. I rezzed it to the ground because I wanted to change something on them and suddenly the permission changed to nocopy/nomod/notransfer. I tried it with the backup copy I had - the same. I went to a noscript area because I thought of a permission change by script, but the permissions still changed. Then I asked about this issue here on the forums and get the advice to get a fresh copy of them from the creator because the permissions were somehow messed up on the asset server. So I got a new copy directly from the owner and suddenly it worked. You should try to do the same - hopefully the item was not too expensive, but perhaps the creator might help you.

As I understand it from reading http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Debug_Permissions (particularly the second section, "what is a slam bit?", changes to permissions you make while the object is in your inventory don't get applied to it until it's rezzed in world.

This is why my business partner and I have to check permissions very carefully before we set anything for sale, because we're always passing full rights versions of items between us to work on, and make sure we set the final permissions when the object is rezzed.

What we have to guard against is making the final product no transfer (or no copy) while it's in inventory and then putting it straight into a box for sale. If we did that, the buyer would unpack the box and find full rights items in his or her inventory, which could then be passed on to friends (or boxed for sale), that only acquired the more restrictive permissions when rezzed.

We have to set the final perms on a rezzed object, take it back into inventory, check it there, and then box it.

Sounds as if your items were set as copy/mod/no transfer while on the ground, the maker took them into inventory and changed the perms there, and then boxed them without re-rezzing them.

Nothing you can do, I think, until the creator comes back.

I'll bet you are right, instead of using sculpt maps to make a bow they might have used an 'example'.

The slam bit issue is interesting - I've never heard of that before.

What I _have_ heard of is the permissions cascade issue, where if you take a box, put a (next-owner: no-copy), script inside it, pick it up, and then set the box on your inventory (next-owner:yes-copy no-transfer), then what you will pass on is a box that is yes-copy until rezzed, but once rezzed becomes no-copy no-transfer. This is because SL doesn't cascade permissions (ie, copying the permissions of less permissive contents up to the container) for objects that aren't rezzed.

That said, I've never heard of it making an object MORE permissive, only less - including creating the forbidden no-copy no-transfer combination. Maybe somebody decided to make this impossible?

INGS, as a professional graphic designer, I just wanted to say that outlining type as you did in your example is certainly a design "don't".

No need to thank me. I'm just doin' my duty.

How come?

It becomes too easy to read.

And she didn't use Comic Sans!

True, that. Think of it as quickie teletext to get the point across. =^-^=

Back to topic... The maker accepted my notecard and rejected the wonked perms returns that, given proper permissions, I should have never been able to return to her... Now, No reply. (T_T)

...and you even blanked out the creator name in the snapshots.

No good deed goes unpunished?