Unexplained and unwanted visitors

[Katherine Heartsong]

15 hours ago, Medusa Torok said:

LOL @ some of the comments on here, thanks guys... very entertaining I have a very nice landlord who has been helping me with this, haven't solved the mystery and probably never will, but he is now allowing me to put up ban lines, which he doesn't normally allow,  he says he does not permit or use bots so its definitely not that.  anyone else who comes knocking won't be able to access my land  so hopefully I can relax now... don't want strangers turning up when I am in the middle of changing my unmentionables.

Wait now. Even in SL we have to change our unmentionables?

That sounds like we have to do laundry as well.

There goes my relaxing time.

[Ingrid Ingersoll]

On 7/30/2023 at 10:11 AM, Love Zhaoying said:

Do you get a lot of guys knocking at your back door?

Edited July 31, 2023 by Ingrid Ingersoll

[Casidy Silvercloud]

I have been unintentionally, though sometimes comically, been entering people's parcels and sims a lot lately. One place I did it twice without realizing because of 2 different lms to 2 different spots on the land lol. Old lms are tricky lil things.

I try not to be a nuisance and I leave really fast, but I'm sure my simple tping in has annoyed at least one person. Shrugs. It's not my fault these places moved, so best to set security if you don't want anyone tping in. Ban lines may or may not help. Unless the lab has changed things (I don't think they have), I don't think they go the full height of a parcel unless it's a specific ban of a specific av. 

Just because it hasn't happened until recently doesn't mean it can't and won't happen again. If that used to be where an event was held, it makes even more sense that it only happened recently (around whenever that event happens, probably). If it was a club, store, someone's family land, all equally possible. 

Edited July 31, 2023 by Casidy Silvercloud
fixed words

[Aethelwine]

You might want to create a landing point for your parcel somewhere suitable like the far end of your garden so when they do appear they aren't so noticeable.

[Luna Bliss]

I don't know if I should start another thread to discuss the following, but perhaps it will fit here. I have a friend with a stalker who shows up frequently wherever she is. As was noted in another thread, she could have an item in her inventory that detects where she is.

But what about listeners? If someone gives you a gift you place out in your home, or constructed something in your home, can the creator of that item  listen to any conversation in open chat?  I imagine they could with the right script which could be detected, but can it be constructed in such a way that the script can't be seen or removed (other than it being no-mod and so preventing investigation) ?

[Love Zhaoying]

If the unwanted visitors are aliens, that would explain a lot.

[Casidy Silvercloud]

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

If someone gives you a gift you place out in your home, or constructed something in your home, can the creator of that item  listen to any conversation in open chat?  I imagine they could with the right script which could be detected, but can it be constructed in such a way that the script can't be seen or removed (other than it being no-mod and so preventing investigation)

My advice is only based on what I used to know, things may have changed since I was last here.

Anything can be used to read local chat, unless it comes in the form of owner say or chat that goes to a specific av/UUID. So, in theory, yes something can be turned into a listener through scripting. The script can't be made impossible to find in an object when the object is taken into edit mode. It can be made so you can't see what it does, but it will always be present in the item, somewhere. It might not be in the root prim of something, you you'll have to look at all of its parts. It also can't be made so that it can't be removed. It can be made to make an item no longer function once removed (both with other scripts or even on its own if the function was directed by it). But you can always remove them.

That's all just for local though and will only read/record/disperse what local chat can read. But I don't exactly know how that will garner information about where someone will be unless they only talk to others in local chat. If your friend suspects an item, have that friend look at everything out, the script will be there, somewhere, if it exists. It's more likely that: your friend has someone else telling this person where she is without your friend knowing it, your friend is friends with this stalker on another name, or your friend has patterns (and those are easy to determine and follow). I'd say the last one is the most likely, but the other two are likely, and all three are far more likely than a listener object spying on her. 

Edited July 31, 2023 by Casidy Silvercloud

[Qie Niangao]

22 minutes ago, Casidy Silvercloud said:

It also can't be made so that it can't be removed. It can be made to make an item no longer function once removed (both with other scripts or even on its own if the function was directed by it). But you can always remove them.

Well, I don't think scripts in a no-mod object can be removed. They also can't be set not-running. If it's suspicious, just remove the no-mod object altogether.

Just in passing: one difference between attached and free-standing scripted objects is that an attached script can run even on no-scripts land. Some attached scripts don't bother, but it's a very common practice that's very useful for the wearer. Free-standing scripts can't do that, but of course if they're owned by somebody with the right parcel permissions they can run, and if they're rezzed on a parcel there's a good chance the owner has such permissions on the land anyway.

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

she could have an item in her inventory that detects where she is

Almost surely this meant "an attachment" not "an item in her inventory", but at the risk of being pedantic: an item in inventory can't do anything until it's rezzed in-world (attached or free-standing) so a simulator is running its scripts.

[Casidy Silvercloud]

8 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Well, I don't think scripts in a no-mod object can be removed.

I haven't tested it since I came back, but I used to take them out of things all the time that I didn't need to function just wanted to look cute. It "broke" anything that should have done something, but that was usually my goal. I had some decor items that did "things" like play music or talk in chat, etc.. They were nice decor items, I didn't need them to do those things. I couldn't edit or look at the script of course, or essentially turn it off, but remove it, no prob. Maybe they changed this though, I'll have to check later when I log in. 

 

[Qie Niangao]

I guess it's possible it changed. But just so we're talking about the same thing: I'm referring to no-mod objects, not no-mod scripts. When I try to delete contents (scripts or anything else) from a no-mod object, I get the pop-up "Though permitted, deleting contents may damage the object, Do you want to delete that item? { OK } { Cancel }" but if you say "OK" it warns "Not permitted to edit this" and doesn't delete it.

I'm not sure what the "Though permitted…" is trying to say, though; maybe it's referring to some earlier time when it actually was permitted.

[Fionalein]

7 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

I guess it's possible it changed. But just so we're talking about the same thing: I'm referring to no-mod objects, not no-mod scripts. When I try to delete contents (scripts or anything else) from a no-mod object, I get the pop-up "Though permitted, deleting contents may damage the object, Do you want to delete that item? { OK } { Cancel }" but if you say "OK" it warns "Not permitted to edit this" and doesn't delete it.

I'm not sure what the "Though permitted…" is trying to say, though; maybe it's referring to some earlier time when it actually was permitted.

have you tried unpacking it (might work with no copy scripts)?

Edited July 31, 2023 by Fionalein

[Casidy Silvercloud]

17 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

I guess it's possible it changed. But just so we're talking about the same thing: I'm referring to no-mod objects, not no-mod scripts. When I try to delete contents (scripts or anything else) from a no-mod object, I get the pop-up "Though permitted, deleting contents may damage the object, Do you want to delete that item? { OK } { Cancel }" but if you say "OK" it warns "Not permitted to edit this" and doesn't delete it.

I'm not sure what the "Though permitted…" is trying to say, though; maybe it's referring to some earlier time when it actually was permitted.

That very well may be a change then. I do know there was a popup warning, or at least when I was paying attention I think I recall a warning, lol. I'm sure I just clicked ok anyway since breaking it was exactly what I aimed to do.  Oh and yes we were talking about the same thing, no-mod objects, not the scripts themselves.

Well hell, it should let me break whatever I want to break damnit, as long as I know I'll be bricking it by taking out scripts. That used to be fun with little things people made that looked awesome but did stuff I didn't need it to do. 

[Lindal Kidd]

On 7/30/2023 at 11:44 AM, Rowan Amore said:

How is using picks as an extension of your profile a misuse?

It's not a misuse. But a lot of people forget that when they make a Pick, the Pick includes the location where they were when they made it.

Or it could be deliberate, as Zalificent has suggested.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

9 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

I'm not sure what the "Though permitted…" is trying to say, though; maybe it's referring to some earlier time when it actually was permitted.

Some objects show ass 'No Mod' because PART of the linkset is no mod, so you MIGHT be able to delete scripts from a mod link, in a theoretically no mod linkset, it's just a generic warning, to cover all possibilities in a complicated inherited permissions system for multi prim objects, with no mod contents.

 

[Jennifer Boyle]

On 7/30/2023 at 7:25 AM, Medusa Torok said:

Hi, I have been renting land for a few months on a private estate and was happy with it, until recently when I started getting uninvited avies visiting me.  It has been suggested to me by a friend that these "visitors" might be bots, used by the landowner or maybe even LL to monitor lag and land use, but I am not so sure - these visitors have detailed profiles, payment info used,  and have been on sl for many years.  They can appear right next to me, they don't speak, they leave shortly after arriving.  Some of them belong to groups that I belong to.  It's weird and I have resorted to using a security orb to get rid of them but they still keep coming and  I am just wondering what this could be all about.  I could be persuaded that they are just bots but why only recently, when I have lived there without interference for months?  Why would someone suddenly begin to spy on me?

Why is it a problem?

[Zalificent Corvinus]

52 minutes ago, Jennifer Boyle said:

Why is it a problem?

What part of "sudden surge of unwanted intruders in my home" do you not understand?

Questions like yours are why people install "zero-second warning punt-kick home and auto ban" security orbs.

[Qie Niangao]

5 hours ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

Some objects show ass 'No Mod' because PART of the linkset is no mod, so you MIGHT be able to delete scripts from a mod link, in a theoretically no mod linkset, it's just a generic warning, to cover all possibilities in a complicated inherited permissions system for multi prim objects, with no mod contents.

This is news to me. I know different links in a linkset can be set to different groups, and of course an object in inventory will reflect the most restrictive permissions of the object and all its links' contents, but I thought the links themselves all had the same permissions. Is there some way to create a linkset with different permissions on different links?

[Zalificent Corvinus]

2 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

This is news to me. I know different links in a linkset can be set to different groups, and of course an object in inventory will reflect the most restrictive permissions of the object and all its links' contents, but I thought the links themselves all had the same permissions. Is there some way to create a linkset with different permissions on different links?

Oh Hell yes, I've had this, building experimental OC devices, I accidentally linked a no trans prim to some full perm parts, then found when I'd picked it p, the item was no trans, until I unlinked the offending prim and replaced it with a full perm one. The link set reports the most restrictive combo perms, but the indivitual partss retain their own perms.

For a no mod thing, if you set next user perms for one link to no mod before linking to the modable rest... then passed the finished item to somebody, that is going to be unpredictable, without doing SCIENCE, lol.

It's like that "alter perms in inventory via properties popup, rez, pick up, now youu get the next user perms on the thing you made your self trap, that we all know about, SL just throws us wobblers now and then, and the error message may well be ambiguous because it was written to cover weird edge cases.

Do science, make sure.

[Luna Bliss]

6 hours ago, Jennifer Boyle said:

On 7/30/2023 at 7:25 AM, Medusa Torok said:

Hi, I have been renting land for a few months on a private estate and was happy with it, until recently when I started getting uninvited avies visiting me.  It has been suggested to me by a friend that these "visitors" might be bots, used by the landowner or maybe even LL to monitor lag and land use, but I am not so sure - these visitors have detailed profiles, payment info used,  and have been on sl for many years.  They can appear right next to me, they don't speak, they leave shortly after arriving.  Some of them belong to groups that I belong to.  It's weird and I have resorted to using a security orb to get rid of them but they still keep coming and  I am just wondering what this could be all about.  I could be persuaded that they are just bots but why only recently, when I have lived there without interference for months?  Why would someone suddenly begin to spy on me?

Why is it a problem?

Human beings typically have privacy requirements, including both the space they live in/pay for, as well as privacy requirements related to their body and the space surrounding it.

When anyone, 1st or 2nd life, lacks privacy boundaries it's always disconcerting because they feel free to invade another's boundaries without concern for what the other might need. It's annoying to have to be in a defensive position and insist on your personal boundaries with another while they keep pushing in on them.

Invading another's home is not respecting privacy boundaries. Just like in 1st life there is the expectation that one can have privacy in one's own home when they've paid for this privacy and own a home/parcel.
With bodily privacy, just like in 1st life there is the expectation that we have space around us that should not be pressed in on (our bodies and a degree of space around them, virtual or 1st life, feel like they belong to us and this space should not be infringed upon without our permission). The amount of space needed varies according to culture -- some cultures require more space so as not to feel offended, while others need less.
Teleporting in right next to someone, standing there and saying nothing, feels very invasive to me.

 

[Aethelwine]

19 hours ago, Aethelwine said:

You might want to create a landing point for your parcel somewhere suitable like the far end of your garden so when they do appear they aren't so noticeable.

 

Developing this idea a little you could set up a platform in the sky and set the landing point there. You could then put up a sign or use a script to ask the person that has arrived there how they got there and suggest messaging you with your answer. Most will probably ignore you but with a well phrased question you might get your answer. Perhaps an old link on marketplace, or someone's profile. With the answer you can then see if you can get the culprit to correct their error.

 

[Qie Niangao]

4 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

For a no mod thing, if you set next user perms for one link to no mod before linking to the modable rest... then passed the finished item to somebody, that is going to be unpredictable, without doing SCIENCE, lol.

Oh, I tried it with an alt before I asked, but there could be specific known conditions that make it possible despite it not working when I tried it a couple different ways.

Maybe there's some slam-bit case, some embedded contents of a link that only slams permissions after rezzing again (sometime after being rezzed to link). I have to re-learn the slam-bit cookbook operations every time I do it, and even though I momentarily understand the principle, it still seems like magic when it works.

[Love Zhaoying]

3 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Oh, I tried it with an alt before I asked, but there could be specific known conditions that make it possible despite it not working when I tried it a couple different ways.

Maybe there's some slam-bit case, some embedded contents of a link that only slams permissions after rezzing again (sometime after being rezzed to link). I have to re-learn the slam-bit cookbook operations every time I do it, and even though I momentarily understand the principle, it still seems like magic when it works.

I honestly thought you could ALWAYS "rip scripts out" of a no-mod item.  You just can't read the scripts or put them back in!

[Qie Niangao]

10 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I honestly thought you could ALWAYS "rip scripts out" of a no-mod item.  You just can't read the scripts or put them back in!

To be honest, I avoid no-mod objects like the plague, so anything they do can't surprise me—which is why I had to test first before saying anything.

[Fionalein]

12 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I honestly thought you could ALWAYS "rip scripts out" of a no-mod item.  You just can't read the scripts or put them back in!

If we could 5 minute demo clothing would be a stupid idea - well it still is but for other reasons.

[Love Zhaoying]

17 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

I guess it's possible it changed. But just so we're talking about the same thing: I'm referring to no-mod objects, not no-mod scripts. When I try to delete contents (scripts or anything else) from a no-mod object, I get the pop-up "Though permitted, deleting contents may damage the object, Do you want to delete that item? { OK } { Cancel }" but if you say "OK" it warns "Not permitted to edit this" and doesn't delete it.

I'm not sure what the "Though permitted…" is trying to say, though; maybe it's referring to some earlier time when it actually was permitted.

I  see now. 

I suspect the object I was thinking of was not itself "no-mod", it was a sculpture of some type so was not modifiable "by nature".  (Whether a sculptie or etc.)

I do remember removing the script from it.  (It was a particle script.)  

I can't remember how we got on this topic from the OP's original topic..because they wanted to modify a security system I guess..