Overactive Security Scripts

They dont do anything! Then again they dont do anything to the perps in SL either! AR's a waste of time and effort!

I disagree with there super secret policy. People that have been griefed are an "interested party" and entitled to the outcome. Since they would only know what happened to a user name and not person it does not violate the privacy act of 1974 as amended.

ARing when you get ejected by a security script is a false report. Try harder.

LL is investigating my report.

Thats a form letter, dear.

Agreed.

But it's not a warning.

Send enough false reports and it will be.

Spooky! But you forgot to make a "woooo" sound like a scary ghost. That would have really given me a chill!

Yes, many times... and while I found it to be an annoyance, I also know it is entirely up to the landowner to do that. It is a risk I run every time I fly over private land...


One thing I do know about security scripts is that they cannot push you while you are seated. They cannot eject you while you are seated.
What they can do is tp you home while seated, but that seems to be something LL want's to stop since it *can* cause crashes.
Or, they can unseat you and eject you...

Of the four options available to remove you from the area, only one is safe and usable... the one you feel is causing grief.

Take the line of thought to it's conclusion... remove the unseat/eject option, and there is no longer a safe and usable way to remove potential griefers. To stop a potential minor annoyance to you, (and it is only minor...) it would result in opening up a potential MAJOR annoyance to a vast number of people.

I simply cannot accept that price for my own reduced annoyance, and I doubt very much you could either.


One observation though... if there's no warning, then the vehicle you were in is on the edge of the property, easily retrievable. If there is a warning first, your vehicle can be so deep inside that you cannot reach it and must wait for the land owner to return it. (depending on the area of land owned and protected)

I've had both happen to me, and the no warning circumstance annoyed me a lot less.

Yet even with these scripts, I fly more now than I ever did before... All too often, I will tp to a sim only vaguely in the same area as my intended destination, then rez a plane and fly the rest of the way, in what can only be termed a meandering course... (the last one was a long tour around both continents, starting at the far north and working my way down south... I ran into 4 scripts... 3 warnings and one that just dumped me halfway across the sim. Not too bad for a 70 min flight...)


Why do I keep doing it? Why keep flying so much when I run into such scripts? Because I've been on both ends of it... I've been griefed because there was no security, griefed because the script gave them a grace period to leave which they used to sit on something, (instant eject is the only defense against that, and is vital for those circumstances) and I've been thrown out of land by security scripts, both with and without any warning.
I can see the need to use these scripts responsibly, and can also see the need to eject trouble makers ASAP.

There is a fine line to walk between not giving them enough time to defeat the security, and giving the innocent enough time to leave the area of their own accord. Unfortunately, that line is almost non-existant due to lag issues, and there will be occasions when people will run afoul of the scripts and annoyed.


My only advice is, accept that it will sometimes happen, and direct your anger at the ones who made such measures necessary in the first place... the griefers themselves.



:disclaimer: in no way, shape or form am I trying to suggest, insinuate or otherwise give the impression that anyone wishes to open the door to easier griefing.
The above is mainly my own opinion of this problem, and my own observations of the circumstances surrounding it.

I have given up on flying in SL. Last weekend I did some RL flying and nothing beats it! No Security scripts, No angry landowners or other such pests! True there are traffic rules in RL but they are a constant and well known. My flying days over over in SL.

I would like to thank all of you out there for destroying my SL flight experience.

It shouldn’t be a risk though. If people don’t want you on their land, they should provide adequate warning. Providing no warning and simply tossing people the moment they enter the property is griefing. If, however, you’ve been warned or are trying to grief yourself, then all bets are off.



Security scripts can both TP you home and eject you out of your vehicle. Maybe they have to do an “unsit” call first, but the effect is the same: I was flying along and then instantly removed from the vehicle.



I’m not trying to take away anyone’s ability to secure their property from unwanted intrusions.

I’d like to take away the ability for people to grief innocent passers-by.

I’d like LL to implement better privacy controls for land owners. Controls that render the security scripts useless and eliminate the griefing of innocent passers-by.



You still have to go looking for it because you don’t know where you are now in relation to where you used to be. And, you still don’t know for sure where your vehicle is. Maybe you don’t think it’s a big deal. I find it quite annoying.



I hope you AR’ed the one that dumped you. We should be able to fly more than an hour or so without having to put up with that crap.



I can see the need for these scripts today too. Like I said, if you’ve been warned or are trying to grief yourself, then all bets are off.

How many times to I have to say that my complaint is only with scripts that grief innocent passers-by not scripts that defend against those who have been warned or those who are actually griefing?



And people need to use their security scripts smartly.



Nor am I trying to make it harder for people to secure their property. In fact, I favor more robust privacy controls.

HP

But it shouldn't be.

And we are both in agreement there... the risk is in running into security scripts. I did not say the risk was running into the insta-eject scripts... just scripts in general.Yes... but they can't do that while you are seated... which is why you would have to be unseated before being ejected.

Again, I would much prefer if there was a built in warning, but sometimes the insta-eject is the only way to stop griefers...Stop right there...

Show me how you know that someone is just an innocent passerby. Explain why someone should allow them the chance to grief them when they've been griefed before and have had enough.

It's all very nice trying to protect the innocent traveller, but the one's whove been griefed to the point that they cannot trust people coming onto their land... what about protecting them?
Is it griefing to not give someone the chance to grief them? If it is, then it's a very sad world out there.Yes, I do... but I also find it a lot more annoying when someone griefs me before my scripts can remove them...

Two sides to every story... and the other side you are not listening to.No, I did not.

Again, I know that people will do that because they have been griefed one too many times... you seem to be arguing that they cannot take the steps needed to prevent it from ever happening to them again.And how do they tell the difference until someone griefs them? And why should they run the risk just so you and I can fly without the occasional annoyance?
Are we more important than they are? Is our momentary lack of annoyance worth their permanent increase risk from griefing?

Please tell me that you're going to say no... but note that doing so would force you to deny your own points.
But you are trying to make it harder for them to protect themselves from griefers...

Yes, it should be.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I have been flying along and instantly dumped out of the vehicle. Not sent home. Removed from the vehicle by the script. I didn't have to stand up myself for the eject from land to work.



To stop griefers, absolutely, but not people just passing through.



When someone new is about to fly through your land, I'll agree that's there's no foolproof way to know whether or not that person is going to grief you. I tend to believe that the vast majority of the people are just passing by. I do find it very sad that some people have lived a second life that has brought them to the point where they're so paranoid of people that they don't know, that they feel like they have to take such draconian measures to protect themselves.

I simply do not believe that merely "because he showed up on my land" to be a good enough reason to say "he's probably a griefer, therefore I should eject him immediately".



I believe I do understand the other side of the story.

I also believe that giving a warning and allowing someone a chance to leave is perfectly reasonable thing to ask for. This assumes if they don't leave, then they get ejected, and then either get a shorter warning next time or simply added to the insta-eject ban list.



Like I said, you can't.



Because most people aren't griefers and if you simply insta-eject everyone who stops by not on your access list, you're griefing yourself.



Neither is more important.




The permanent increased risk from griefing is miniscule if a warning system is implemented as I described above. If that system doesn't work, then the land owner has got bigger problems than me (and anyone else) ARing insta-eject security systems.



Not really. Asking for a delay as described above is reasonable.

Allowing insta-eject security scripts just shifts some of the griefing from the griefers to the landowners. Thus, turning the landowners into griefers and making it harder for me to protect myself from griefers.

Short term: security script owners add warning to let passers-by by
Long term: LL implements better privacy controls making the scripts unneeded.

HP

Which is exactly how the land tool option works.



No, you're NOT greifing. You are simply limiting access to land and airspace YOU PAY FOR.



Actually, one is. The landowners rights and desires trump the travellers on and over their land. They pay for that parcel, you don't.


Short term AND longterm: LL implements better security land tools.

Why should you be able to unsit() and teleport me home with no warning, so I have to go back and hunt around or leave a vehicle behind to mess you or someone else (depending on how the vehicle's scripted) up?

This doesn't mean you should have to give a SECOND warning if the same person comes back repeatedly after being teleported home with warning, or you've had to put a specific person in an "autokick" list.

Just that NOBODY should have to worry about random scripts tossing them from their vehicles and teleporting them home without warning. Ever.

There are NO absolute rights. Your rights to swing your virtual fist stops at my virtual nose, even if it's on your virtual land at the time.

There will always be the ones who complain 'I need more than 10 seconds because of lag' or 'I need more than 30 seconds because my vehicle is slow.'

You can't please everyone. The landowners pay monthly (unless you have the 4096 free teir) for the parcel. THEIR desires are top priority there.

NOBODY who doesn't want people over their airspace should have to worry about it.

My right to eject your virtual nose begins at my virtual land parcel limit, with or without warning.

What I am getting at, and what you missed yet again, is that to eject you, the script MUST unseat you... the way SL works will not allow you to be ejected while still sat in your vehicle...

If we ever want to eject someone in a vehicle, SL forces us to unseat you. Is that the problem, that you get unseated? Then have a go at the Lindens to change the damn thing!

And as Jonas kindly pointed out, that is exactly what the land tools do anyway... Gonna class that as griefing too?You find it sad that people have suffered so much griefing that they take such measures, but you show that you want them to remain open to yet more griefing...

Have some sympathy for them... let them protect themselves on their land how they feel they need to. Just as you are asking them to allow you to roam as you feel YOU need to.

It swings both ways, but you are not giving them any allowance.No... but understand how it is. People turn up and grief instantly. Find me a way to stop that without using insta-eject.

I'll make it real easy for you. THERE IS NO OTHER WAY!


Btw, I tend to believe that most people don't want to break into my home... doesn't mean I'll give them the chance to do so.Really... so you support allowing people time to grief others?
You don't? Then why are you arguing for just that?

Again... any delay between warning and ejecting is time a griefer can use to cause problems. And if they've suffered to the point that they no longer want to give them that chance, who are you to say they are wrong?

Go and suffer daily griefing attacks for a week, then tell me that you want to give them the chance to keep on doing it... You would change your tune so sodding fast. (we only had it for 3 days, and I was seriously considering the insta-eject option)Now, you state that as fact, but where exactly does it say that?

Does it say it in Tos? Nope.
Does it say it in CS? Nope.
Does it, in fact, say it anywhere except in the opinion of some people? Nope!

Not griefing, unless it is doing it OUTSIDE the boundries of their land. But you are saying it is griefing no matter what.Yes.. a warning system is implemented meaning the griefer still has time to cause grief.

Do you understand this yet? ANY amount of delay before ejection is time available for griefing to be done!
And don't say it doesn't happen, since I've suffered it myself.

And ARing landowners who insta-eject only in the boundries of their land is a no-no, since they are well within ToS, CS and their rights as the land owners...Asking for a delay is reasonable as it gives a window of opportunity for griefered to grief people...
Yes, I can see how it's reasonable.

Start thinking of the downside to your suggestion...:BZZZT: and again, opinion stated as fact and ignoring the facts themselves.

Once more, you can only class it as griefing IF and only if it is activating OUTSIDE the land boundries...
Oh, and you flying over someone's land could be classed as griefing, since it could be causing the landowner grief simply by you being there.

Not the same kind of griefing as you being ejected? Well, you being ejected isn't the same as the owner having someone come in and shoot the place to shit.

If you wish you're annoyance to be griefing, then their annoyance should be allowed the same. Anything else is putting you above them.
Short term, allow the land owners to secure their land in any way they see fit that doesn't violate ToS or CS. If that means they no longer want to give griefers a chance to grief them, then so be it.
Long term, allow the land owners to secure their land in any way they see fit that doesn't violate ToS or CS. If that means they no longer want to give griefers a chance to grief them, then so be it.

Short/long term, LL implements better SECURITY controls making the scripts unneeded. (I don't see how better privacy is going to stop a random griefing attack, can you?)

Though, since by default unless there's ban lines up it's not really visible where your "virtual land parcel" actually begins and ends, nor if you have anything against someone passing through it... a few seconds of warning is a nice thing to give, and can allow someone who is genuinely not trying to intrude a chance to move out.

Just common courtesy. Not as much to do with one's right or lack thereof, but more with fact human interactions on the whole work better when the 'right and law' isn't something that is followed with Judge Dread'esque zeal, just because one can to...

The difference here would be, people can very well see long in advance where your home *is* ... and locked door is a very good statement of intentions that you don't want them to enter.

In SL, if just crossing the (normally invisible) line between one parcel and another might end with geting sent kilometres away because it just happens this particular owner minds tresspasers... it's simply not so obvious.


A honest question, since i didn't give it a thought what possible ways one could have to "grief" land owners. What sort of griefing it's possible for someone who steps one meter into your property, as opposed to being that one meter farther out, i.e. being on the border? I mean, can't even really say "it's because they are there" because well... it's just a meter of difference, isn't it? i.e. they pretty much "are there" in both cases o.O;

Just to point out that it doesn't stop people, does it? (thinks of the git who ran into a locked security door, tried to open it a few times, rezzed an object and basically broke into the place, then sat there wanking in front of me and my friend... yes, I've been burned all too many times)Which is the only reason I don't really agree with the scripts working on the entire amount of land... unless it's a small parcel, of course.

One thing I have said, right from the start, is that they should be used responsibly... as in, only in the area you want private, rather than willy-nilly. (which is why you would have the indication of a building letting you know there might be a script there... and if you're flying too fast to see it before you reach it, then you're flying way too fast)
The problem here is it's not just the case of a metre, is it? That is taking the difference to an absurd extreme.
Take, for example, the normal flying speed of an AV... in, say, 6 seconds, just how far inside an area can they get?
More to the point, it would easily get them into firing range of anyone who is there...

What kind of possible griefing could someone do with 6 seconds to get inside, aim and fire? Just about any kind of griefing they could do if there was no script to stop them.

That is an unfortunate side-effect of insisting on the delay/warning, and it is such a serious side-effect that you might as well not have the security in place at all.


This is all based on someone deliberately trying to grief an area... not an uncommon event, when the entire grid is considered. In those circumstances, the instant eject option is very understandable.
I might not like it, but I can see why it is a neccessary option and should not be denied until there is a better way to deal with determined griefers. (and I have a lot of sympathy for those who have been pushed to that point... I'm wasn't that far from saying "sod it" and doing it myself thanks to other people's actions)



Oh, and one last thing... in my mind, ARing someone who has been pushed to that point is adding insult to injury. Kinda shows why I'm against ARing them at all, IF they use scripts properly...

Aye, if someone is determined to be asshat then of course, it's not something that really affects them ... was rather thinking of difference in example you mention, between breaking into RL house and entering the SL property. The former is always obvious to the person doing it, the latter not always so... which is why i think acting upon them entering the very second it happens, is going just a bit overboard when it involves moving them sometimes large distance across the world.


Agreed on the responsibility thing. I definitely don't mind these security scripts being used, as long as it's made clear that some area is off-limits, with enough advance to give whoever is affected a chance to react. Regarding the presence of building etc being enough of a warning itself, am not entirely sure -- it's not unfrequent to have drawing distance set to 64-96 m just to get reasonable frame rates and keep the data feed manageable, and security scripts according to their descriptions can and often do use 100 m range. So i think a warning when one enters that 100m zone and then booting them if after say, ~5 secs they're still there would be sensible middle ground (the sensor should keep a list of recent tresspassers and when they re-enter act immediately, so it cannot be played by entering, staying there these few secs and moving out to reset the 'allowed time in')


Well, but then it's exactly what some advocate as far as security scripts go -- if the very moment someone enters, they're to be ejected no chance to leave given, this is the practical equivalent of that metre thing. And i'd agreee this is "absurd extreme" but this is very much what the "MY land, MY right, screw YOU" approach leads to.


Mhm, but then you don't need to really wait that long just to see if someone is indeed moving out. Just check their distance to the sensor after 2-3 secs -- if it's smaller than on last check rather than larger, then good riddance to them, they had their chance. Or you can have something like overlapping sensors, with one issuing the warning and giving few seconds out, and another with some 20-25 meter less range (so still ~75 m i.e often more than drawing distance) booting people out immediately.... whichever happens first. Now this can of course be issue with lag and whatnot, but it wouldn't be fair to expect the property owner to give people even more warning than that.


True. I think sensible written security system could simply keep a track on the tresspassers over given period of time -- if you have people who enter and get a warning, you can expect next time they appear they're already aware the area is off-limits. So the sooner they're back, the less leeway they get, all way to immediate eject if they come again 'too soon'... or something o.O

I don't understand why people think they have a right to enter what is obviously private residences in SL, when they accept that they don't have that right in RL. The phrase usually thrown at me when our security script ejects such a person is.. 'It's just a game', fine, it might be to you, but then, why do you care if you're ejected from my home, its just a game, right?

I said it earlier in the thread, and I will say it again: When I am exploring, if I come across a building that looks like it is residential, I back away, I have no desire to start poking around other people's personal space. I have even backed away from places I have expressly TP'ed to from find results, simply because the *house* presented in front of me didn't look at all like the commercial entity I was hoping to find.

Now, if other people could just start seeing things that way, the grid would be a much better place, and eventually security scripts and skyboxes may not be needed.



If you've flying too fast for your video card to rez buildings/obstacles, either fly slower, or buy a better video card! Sorry, this is a pathetic excuse, its like excusing a RL airliner pilot from crashing into the ground because he has bad vision.

If you can't safetly accomplish what you're doing at that speed, don't do it!

Btw, I will add that if you're flying such that you need to reduce your draw distance, you're flying too low. Draw distance at a safe altitude should be capable of being higher than your ground-based draw distance. Personally, I use ~200m on the ground, and 256-320m when flying. Sometimes obstacles haven't finished rezzing before I pass them, but tbh, my desire to smack into a grey wall with white lines at 20m/S is just as low as my desire to smack into a beautifully textured wall at 20m/S.


And before you claim 'But I like flying fast', fine, there are plenty of void sims on the grid just waiting for you, you'll be able to tell them easily, since they have no 'build' shading on the mini map. Knock yourself out on those, just don't expect any sympathy from me if you come barrelling into my house's walls or the security script at 30m/S simply because you are outstripping your video card's capabilities 'for fun'.





You know, when I came into this thread, our security script was set to 6 seconds warning. After a couple of posts I increased the warning to 10s, but now, after all the posturing about 'need more time!!' I'm starting to grow weary on this line, and am very tempted to reduce it to much less again. I've had people complain about our script on 6s, saying that '30s is what i need, what if i'm sailing past' uhhh, the security orb is about 60 meters from the sea, and its set to 34m, if you're 'sailing' into the radius, you have bigger problems than my security script.




I've thought about this before now, the problem is, the complexity required to ensure that such a sanity check on 'leaving the area' isn't gamed, is significant. For example, as stated, your security script would be breachable simply by moving forward for a few seconds, getting a warning, then moving backwards *slower than you approached* for a few more seconds. A griefer would just abuse this within minutes. And don't think they wouldn't realise... I've watched griefers try repeatedly to find the boundaries of our script, to see if they can find a spot where they may just be <20m from where we are sitting, but that isn't covered by the security.

Even if you start narrowing down the requirements for them to be kicked, its very difficult to make this work, other than saying....

If the person has been warned, then grant them *additional* warning time if they are further away on the second sensor sweep, and on the third sensor sweep, kick them anyway.

The problem with this, is that if you have your warning time set high, say, 6 seconds, the default on psyke's, then you've effectively just granted them 18 seconds to grief you, at a time. Its a lot of time, plenty enough to set a nuke and leave, plenty to set a chat logger/relay, etc. It also means the sensor sweeps aren't very accurate given that there is 6 seconds between each scan.

Every time you make some 'compromise' in terms of making it 'fairer' on people just passing thru, you are giving the griefers just one more vector to abuse. And sorry, but the amount of time a newbie passer-thru feels they need is always going to be more than a griefer needs. Given this, you might as well just accept that the griefer is the target for the security script, that dealing with them is the key priority, and the newbie passer-thru can just deal with it!



Again, its an issue of complexity. It can be done, but the way LSL is, it stands in the way. Because of memory limitations on scripts, because of lack of dictionary objects in LSL. Trying to implement this sort of system results in *some* trade-off, and will result in some kind of exploitable weakness in the script. Now, depending on how widespread a script is, and how bad the weakness is, that may or may not be a big deal. Weaknesses in a commonly used script are going to be far more likely to be exploited than a (non-common) weakness in an individual script written by the resident themselves. The problem is, all the complexity of making a 'fair' script results in a long development time that most are going to want to recoup.

As someone who has suffered 'eject home' many times whilst innocently flying about, I see no justification for security.

If there are clearly defined borders, such as the 'ban lines' on the ground, then great. But up in the air, to be flying around then suddenly see "you will be teleported home in 3.. 2.. 1.. boom" out of nowhere gives you no chance to avoid anything.

If you aren't at home, why should you care if anyone goes on your land? You don't own the land, and consequently don't have any rights, you just pay LL for the privilege of using it.

If you are at home and someone 'intrudes' on your 'privacy', then you can boot and ban. Except for those circumstances, you are being a griefer by banning anyone who just passes by.

I don't understand what the need is for 'privacy' anyway because it's an online game, if you don't want other people around, log out. You can talk in Yahoo messenger or something.

Lewis