Bypassing permission

Okay, I saw it but I didn't use it.
Apparently, there is a collar in game that when someone wears it, it makes the wearer follow certain commands from a specific Master. (Yeah, it's a D/s thing. Got Me interested)
I want to know how the code can bypass the animation permission.
You guessed it, I want to write something simuliar.
Any ideas?

If you put the collar on yourself, you grant permission. If you don't want to be controlled, you take the collar off. Permission is given by wearing the collar.

Lovepeace.

It doesnt Bypass the Animations Permission, it just requests them on attach of the person who wears the collar.

But as of a few patches ago I believe attachments aready grant Animation permissions when you attach them.

Hope that helps

In addition the wearer of the collar chooses who can control them through it (at least normally). It's a voluntary thing to wear (has to be in SL) and you choose who you submit to.

But yes, if you wear an attachment you still ask for permissions, but they are automatically granted. Once you've got them you don't have to ask afresh with each animation either.

In my experience it depends on how the object is set up as simply wearing the attachment doesn't always grant permission. When you are making an attachment it will ask you the first time you put it on if you want to grant it animation permission, if the developer says Yes and then stuffs it in his/her inventory then it wont ask you when anybody puts it on. If the dev didn't grant it initial permission it will ask the user.

I'm not sure if it's still that way as of 1.6, though; I haven't used them in a long time.

I don't think it's that way... An attached object will usually auto-magically get permissions.

You still need to check for permissions, though.

Yep - so long as the script is in the root prim of the attachment.

Always ask and use run_time_permissions() to organise your permissions-nessesary script activity. You never really know what your end user is going to do with it, better to make robust code than make assumptions that'll later end up spamming the heck out of everyone with permissions-missing errors.