[Opensim-dev] Change parcel permission handling

[Fleep Tuque]

I'm trying to think of a use case when I wanted a PARCEL_OWNER to have
privileges that the ESTATE_MANAGER did/should not have and can't think of
one off the top of my head.  In every scenario I can think of where I
assigned an Estate Manager through the Estate tools rather than using group
permissions, it was because I expected them to have MORE permissions than
the parcel owners and was setting that explicitly.

Having said that, I do agree with Melanie that I would not expect a
permission change on PARCEL_OWNER to affect the permissions for
ESTATE_MANAGER.  Generally I think of permissions inheriting "down" the
hierarchy, not "up", and I'm not sure the average grid owner would expect
that kind of behavior.

- Chris/Fleep

Chris M. Collins (SL/OS: Fleep Tuque)
Center for Simulations & Virtual Environments Research (UCSIM)
UCIT Instructional & Research Computing
University of Cincinnati
406A Zimmer Hall
315 College Drive
PO BOX 210088
Cincinnati, OH 45221-0088
chris.collins at uc.edu
(513) 556-3018

http://ucsim.uc.edu

On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Melanie <melanie at t-data.com> wrote:

> Not true.
>
> Even in SL estate owners/managers don't have some parcel rights. If
> I specify parcel owner, i expect parcel owner. Maybe a way needs to
> be found to combine multiple strings, e.g.
> ESTATE_MANAGER,PARCEL_OWNER. That would be acceptable. Changing the
> current behavior that people already depend on to relax security is
> not acceptable. It may mean that someone suddenly can do something
> they could not do before and the owners may not be aware of this,
> causing issues.
>
> Also, in case of a group owned parcel, group permissions govern what
> people in the group can do. Group members are by no means owners,
> often parcels are deeded only for access control but normal members
> have no rights whatsoever. Giving them potentially dangerous
> functions is not an option.
>
> On group owned parcels, those functions can be allowed either to
> group owners only (the group invite functions already do this check)
> or to deeded prims only. Allowing them for every member of the group
> is really bad. You don't really want to have your roleplay's members
> osTeleportAgent the opponents out of the fight!
>
> Again, relaxing existing constraints is not an option, but as you
> can see above, ways can be found to define combinations of
> permissions to allow more flexibility.
>
> Melanie
>
> On 13/04/2012 14:42, Oren Hurvitz wrote:
> > The decision whether to allow the parcel owner to call a function or not
> is
> > set by whoever setup OpenSim.ini: they can choose to allow PARCEL_OWNER,
> or
> > only ESTATE_OWNER. If they decided to allow the PARCEL_OWNER then we
> should
> > also allow the estate manager/owner to call that function. In addition,
> in
> > the case of a group-owned parcel, all members of the group are owners.
> >
> > So this change doesn't allow more permissions: it would only correct the
> > implementation of the existing permissions system, when PARCEL_OWNER has
> > been specified.
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> http://opensim-dev.2196679.n2.nabble.com/Remove-check-for-IsGod-in-some-OSSL-functions-tp7462127p7462567.html
> > Sent from the opensim-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20120413/674a04a6/attachment-0001.html>