Jump to content

Questionable MP item ..


Recommended Posts

Thoughts and information about this item on MP.

It is sold as an alt detector, but I seem to recall LL banning these items.. (red zone etc) Is this a legit device and how would it work? Understanding that the media and music links can be a way.. Just curious.

 The sellers profile is interesting as well... a 14 yo avatar.

The following if from ad.

"This will protect your place in Second Life from alts (a user with multiple avatars). For various reasons many parcel owners and event hosts prefer not to invite alts to their parties. It is perfectly understandable, and well within the land owners rights to want to control who has access to their land. This tool will securely and discretely test everyone who enters your parcel to find out if they're controlling more than one avatar at the same time.

When it discovers alts it adds them to your land's ban list, and they get automatically ejected from your land. You can control how long the bans last, set it to 0 to make it permanent, or set any other number to ban them for that many hours.

You can also control what is said to the users in local-chat when they are tested for alts, and have it say different things to alt users than it says to regular users. There's even a white-list feature in the Settings notecard where you can set an unlimited number of avatars to "skip" the test and simply be allowed to stay.

Now has a Managers List! The owner and managers can use a touch-based menu system to control the settings and WhiteList options, as well as turn the Alt Blocker on and off.

This is a tool for land owners (and renters). It is Transferable so that you can deed it if necessary, that means that it is Non-Copyable (you will need one of these for each parcel, if you need a lot then contact me for a bulk deal). To be clear, the object is Modifiable but the script is not. Do not unpack the object you receive, it's not boxed. Please read the included instructions notecard for help getting started. If you need more help then please contact Anamolie Poitier. Click the "See Item In Second Life" link below to come visit my SL home where I have this rezzed and see how it works, you can test it safely with your own alts."

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/Alt-Blocker-Easily-Protect-Your-Land-From-Alt-Users/21505125?ple=r

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tarina Sewell said:

This tool will securely and discretely test everyone who enters your parcel to find out if they're controlling more than one avatar at the same time.

 

I am trying not to twitch. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Are there really people longer than a few month in SL, who don't have at least one alt for whatever reason?
Must be a gadget from the drama department.

Edited by Sid Nagy
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does sound rather Red Zone-ish, but without the high pressure fear elements (own one and your own alts will go undetected!), and without the all-important network and database.

I don't see how this could work effectively except in a very limited way. What made Red Zone a powerful tool (albeit extremely questionably for the purposes for which it was putatively designed) was 1) that there were hundreds if not (at one point) thousands of the devices out there harvesting IPs, and 2) generating a database that all users could access.

It also fails to note that it's only effective if one has media enabled -- which I think is still needed to detect and IP?

On the whole, a bit of a scam, but one that should be ARed because its intent is clearly in violation of the ToS, just as Red Zone's was.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Flagged on MP.

The available categories aren't terribly clear. I chose "Disallowed Listing Practices" >> "Harmful or disruptive content."

Yes, I was uncertain myself which to choose.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tarina Sewell said:

Yes, I was uncertain myself which to choose.

You'd think there'd just be a simple "In violation of ToS and CS," wouldn't you?

Good catch, Tarina, in any case.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It spams the following, and then ejects if you don't open the web page.

It worded as to appear optional .. but it's really not.

ybl3SMN.png

it requires an experience to operate.

Nk1qxys.png

and once triggered kick bans everyone it determines is on a shared IP address.

 

There is no way this isn't knowingly against the ToS.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

There is no way this isn't knowingly against the ToS.

I don't like the thing any more than you do, but I'm not so sure it's covered by anything here:

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Residents'_privacy_rights

My particular objection to Red Zone was that it purported to identify people's alts (rather than just flag that avatar's  IP address in question was used by > 1 account) and to share that information with all other Red Zone owners, which this doesn't seem to do.

I can think of ways the scripter could use it to scrape data that would enable them to identify people (you can think of ways too, I'm sure, but let's not discuss that in public), though I doubt that's the case here, but even if they did, so long as they don't share that information with anyone, is that against ToS?

Anyway, simple solution which I propose to adopt -- in the unlikely event I'm confronted with one of those dialogue messages, I'm off somewhere else and not coming back.  End of.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think simply stating that no one will ever know your alts would cover them against a ToS violation.  They can SAY one thing and DO another without anyone being aware.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I don't like the thing any more than you do, but I'm not so sure it's covered by anything here:

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Residents'_privacy_rights

My particular objection to Red Zone was that it purported to identify people's alts (rather than just flag that avatar's  IP address in question was used by > 1 account) and to share that information with all other Red Zone owners, which this doesn't seem to do.

I can think of ways the scripter could use it to scrape data that would enable them to identify people (you can think of ways too, I'm sure, but let's not discuss that in public), though I doubt that's the case here, but even if they did, so long as they don't share that information with anyone, is that against ToS?

Anyway, simple solution which I propose to adopt -- in the unlikely event I'm confronted with one of those dialogue messages, I'm off somewhere else and not coming back.  End of.

The device clearly is trying to find a workaround that avoids the obvious pitfalls that eventually (after a loooong time) got Red Zone banned, but the intent, it seems to me, is still pretty clearly to identify alts, even if it isn't packaging that up in a neat little database somewhere. As I understand how this works . . . Avatar A shows up, accepts the Experience, and all is well. Avatar B, who shares the same IP as Avatar A (which may or may not mean it's an alt of "A") shows up, accepts the Experience, and both Avatar A and Avatar B are immediately booted. Pretty clear conclusion to be gleaned by anyone present? Avatar B is an alt of Avatar A.

Also, I'm not clear . . . does the device store the IPs of avatars, or just the names of those who have been booted.

This is certainly against the spirit if not the letter of the ToS (and I think a case could be made for the latter too).

But yes, you're right: if I show up at a place that demands as the price of entry that I submit to this kind of check . . . yeah, I'm out the door on my own steam right away, alts or no alts. And I'd happily share my feelings about the place with, well, anyone I know.

Edited by Scylla Rhiadra
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"By clicking through to the url you consent (and agree that it's okay in your country) to be tested to prove that you're not using alts."

I'm not quite sure where on legislation.gov.uk I should be looking for that particular guidance...

  • Like 2
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Privacy Policy Section 5.2

If you collect or process Personal Information of users associated with the European Economic Area on a Linden Lab website or create or use of programs or applications that retain information about such Linden Lab users or their computers, you may also have obligations under the GDPR. You should seek independent legal advice relating to your status and obligations under the GDPR.  Nothing on this website is intended to provide you with, nor should it be used as a substitute for, legal advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is this different from that other super popular security system that is used by many regions and auto-bans detected alts of already banned accounts -- other than them not specifically advertising that they will ban all alts?  As far as I understand it, that system also doesn't share IPs or alt names, but will ban suspected alts of banned accounts.  I think they totally rely on getting your IP from your music/media stream though and don't ask you to go to some website to be checked out.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

The device clearly is trying to find a workaround that avoids the obvious pitfalls that eventually (after a loooong time) got Red Zone banned, but the intent, it seems to me, is still pretty clearly to identify alts, even if it isn't packaging that up in a neat little database somewhere. As I understand how this works . . . Avatar A shows up, accepts the Experience, and all is well. Avatar B, who shares the same IP as Avatar A (which may or may not mean it's an alt of "A") shows up, accepts the Experience, and both Avatar A and Avatar B are immediately booted. Pretty clear conclusion to be gleaned by anyone present? Avatar B is an alt of Avatar A.

Also, I'm not clear . . . does the device store the IPs of avatars, or just the names of those who have been booted.

This is certainly against the spirit if not the letter of the ToS (and I think a case could be made for the latter too).

But yes, you're right: if I show up at a place that demands as the price of entry that I submit to this kind of check . . . yeah, I'm out the door on my own steam right away, alts or no alts. And I'd happily share my feelings about the place with, well, anyone I know.

Nope, the image Trinity posted shows a dialog window that offers to open a webpage if you consent.     If you consent, that opens up an external web page, which automatically exposes a great deal of data, quite apart from any data it asks you to enter.  It's on the basis of that data a decision is made as to whether you're an alt or not.

The experience, I think, is primarily used for local data storage.  

I understand the basic design and it doesn't need to expose any data to anyone but the scripter, and the scripter would have to have some ulterior motive for collecting the data and storing it in usable form, because that would take a lot of extra code beyond the basic purpose.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I understand the basic design and it doesn't need to expose any data to anyone but the scripter, and the scripter would have to have some ulterior motive for collecting the data and storing it in usable form, because that would take a lot of extra code beyond the basic purpose.

Understood. So, this doesn't require media streaming -- just that you open the web page.

Which you'd have to be pretty stupid to do, surely.

But if there is no ulterior motive for collecting data, why go that route?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Understood. So, this doesn't require media streaming -- just that you open the web page.

Which you'd have to be pretty stupid to do, surely.

But if there is no ulterior motive for collecting data, why go that route?

That's what I'm saying -- if all you want to know is whether someone with these IP details has visited the parcel before on another account, all you need to see are one or two pieces of data, make a comparison, and you've got what you need.

You would have no reason to store anything, other than the username and ip details of any new visitor to the parcel.  

So if it's used only for the purposes described in the listing and the help notecard I don't think it's against ToS, objectionable though it may be in other ways.

I see, too, that it has an option to autoban people from the parcel.   Autobanninng people is against the Covenant in Bellisseria, which anyone with a New Linden Home might want to bear in mind.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

But if there is no ulterior motive for collecting data, why go that route?

For the same reason that engineers sometimes add extra "features" to all sorts of consumer devices: "It's easy, so why not?"  It's Sir Edmund Hillary's rationale for climbing Mt Everest: "Because it is there."

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Innula Zenovka said:

So if it's used only for the purposes described in the listing and the help notecard I don't think it's against ToS, objectionable though it may be in other ways.

But this is my point. IF the sole point is as listed, it makes no sense to ask the visitor to open a web page. That's overkill.

The fact that it does seems to me suspicious?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...