[Opensim-dev] AssetBase and metadata

[Frisby, Adam]

Hrrm, do remember however that it still isn't 'secure' since the messages can be forged easily enough.

It might be worth considering a proposal I fielded about 2 years back on this list for a semi-encrypted asset shell.

It's pretty simple - we encrypt all assets on upload, and we can then store the decoding key inside the inventory item. That way assets can be proxied for scaling, without increasing the risk profile. (as long as no-one starts copying the dec. keys)

Adam

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev-
> bounces at lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Teravus Ovares
> Sent: Sunday, 1 February 2009 8:59 PM
> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] AssetBase and metadata
>
> Is there any reason that we don't request items from the asset server
> internally by the inventory UUID instead of the asset UUID?
> Requesting assets by inventory UUID would make it a LOT simpler to
> apply permissions at the trusted service level instead of at the
> simulator level.
>
> Best Regards
>
> Teravus
>
> On 2/1/09, Mike Mazur <mmazur at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 07:37:27 -0500
> > Sean Dague <sdague at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It's fine for the object to be called AssetMetaData, just don't
> make
> > > the property that.
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 14:51:12 +0000 (GMT)
> > MW <michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > I agree, I'd say call the class AssetMetaData, but just call the
> > > property (in AssetBase) MetaData.
> >
> > Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the feedback.
> >
> > Mike
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensim-dev mailing list
> > Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev