Second Life Forums Archive - llRemoteLoadScriptPin()

Huns Valen

Don't PM me here.

Join date: 3 May 2003

Posts: 2,749

03-24-2004 22:22

How about taking away the requirement that the object be modifiable by the owner? I would like to use this for product updates, but I'm not prepared to make the product itself modifiable. I think the pin should be all the authentication that is required.

_____________________

[ huns? || words || 1TBS KREW || VHI Aircraft || Whitepaper on Aircraft Physics ]

Make yourself and your objects immune to llPushObject().

Christopher Omega

Oxymoron

Join date: 28 Mar 2003

Posts: 1,828

03-24-2004 22:52

Huns, would you mind elablorating on how this feature suggestion would be useful? Im not totally getting at what your asking

Hawk Statosky

Camouflage tourist

Join date: 11 Nov 2003

Posts: 175

03-25-2004 01:44

Automatic software updates when a bug is found, if I'm reading this right...

_____________________

This .sig has been cancelled due to lack of interest.

Moleculor Satyr

Fireflies!

Join date: 5 Jan 2004

Posts: 2,650

03-25-2004 08:11

I made this request a while back myself. Unfortunately if the owner requirement is removed, it would be possible to 'brute-force' your way into a RemoteLoadScriptable object, by just randomly trying PIN numbers.

The way I'm doing it now is I just sell updates for L$0. Personally I'd love just wearing an attachment that would update anything around me, so my updates would distribute automatically, but it won't ever happen.

(Perhaps Owner and Creator?)

_____________________

</sarcasm>

Catherine Omega

Geometry Ninja

Join date: 10 Jan 2003

Posts: 2,053

03-25-2004 09:40

Well...

Come 1.3, what you could do is this:

Put a seperate script in all the objects you sold that you also wanted to let users update, with a seperate chat command, like... oh, "update"...

Then, when that command was invoked, the script would run llMD5String using the user's name and a predetermined integer. (Is this technically called a key? Not in the LSL type sense, but in the crypto sense?)

Next, it would append the MD5 checksum it generated name of that object, at which point the user could pick up the object, and drop it on your updater. The updater object would take the name of that object, now in its inventory, run the same process internally and see if the user's name and the integer matches up with the object given to it.

If it does, it assumes that the new owner is a valid user and gives them an updated copy of the object.

You could also use object > XML-RPC > object messaging to have all the items you sold people automatically ask your updater if they are, in fact, using the latest version. If not, you could have them shut down. (Yay, DRM!)

Edit: I don't technically know what I'm talking about.
Edit 2: Fixed punctuation error.

_____________________

Need scripting help? Visit the LSL Wiki!
Omega Point - Catherine Omega's Blog

llRemoteLoadScriptPin()
Huns Valen Don't PM me here. Join date: 3 May 2003 Posts: 2,749	03-24-2004 22:22 How about taking away the requirement that the object be modifiable by the owner? I would like to use this for product updates, but I'm not prepared to make the product itself modifiable. I think the pin should be all the authentication that is required. _____________________ [ huns? \|\| words \|\| 1TBS KREW \|\| VHI Aircraft \|\| Whitepaper on Aircraft Physics ] Make yourself and your objects immune to llPushObject().
Christopher Omega Oxymoron Join date: 28 Mar 2003 Posts: 1,828	03-24-2004 22:52 Huns, would you mind elablorating on how this feature suggestion would be useful? Im not totally getting at what your asking
Hawk Statosky Camouflage tourist Join date: 11 Nov 2003 Posts: 175	03-25-2004 01:44 Automatic software updates when a bug is found, if I'm reading this right... _____________________ This .sig has been cancelled due to lack of interest.
Moleculor Satyr Fireflies! Join date: 5 Jan 2004 Posts: 2,650	03-25-2004 08:11 I made this request a while back myself. Unfortunately if the owner requirement is removed, it would be possible to 'brute-force' your way into a RemoteLoadScriptable object, by just randomly trying PIN numbers. The way I'm doing it now is I just sell updates for L$0. Personally I'd love just wearing an attachment that would update anything around me, so my updates would distribute automatically, but it won't ever happen. (Perhaps Owner and Creator?) _____________________ </sarcasm>
Catherine Omega Geometry Ninja Join date: 10 Jan 2003 Posts: 2,053	03-25-2004 09:40 Well... Come 1.3, what you could do is this: Put a seperate script in all the objects you sold that you also wanted to let users update, with a seperate chat command, like... oh, "update"... Then, when that command was invoked, the script would run llMD5String using the user's name and a predetermined integer. (Is this technically called a key? Not in the LSL type sense, but in the crypto sense?) Next, it would append the MD5 checksum it generated name of that object, at which point the user could pick up the object, and drop it on your updater. The updater object would take the name of that object, now in its inventory, run the same process internally and see if the user's name and the integer matches up with the object given to it. If it does, it assumes that the new owner is a valid user and gives them an updated copy of the object. You could also use object > XML-RPC > object messaging to have all the items you sold people automatically ask your updater if they are, in fact, using the latest version. If not, you could have them shut down. (Yay, DRM!) Edit: I don't technically know what I'm talking about. Edit 2: Fixed punctuation error. _____________________ Need scripting help? Visit the LSL Wiki! Omega Point - Catherine Omega's Blog

Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

llRemoteLoadScriptPin()