[Opensim-dev] Remove check for IsGod in some OSSL functions

[Justin Clark-Casey]

I can see an argument for ESTATE_OWNER and ESTATE_MANAGER being separate categories.  I'm assuming that in the viewer 
estate owners are can also be listed/not listed as estate managers.  As Melanie says, we have to be aware that 
OpenSimulator is trying to accomodate many different use cases.

However, that does not mean that permission categories can be allowed to become a confusing and/or overlapping mess. 
Whether that is or isn't the case I don't know - this needs to be written out properly on the wiki for all permission 
types (parcel, estate, etc.) rather than only being embedded within the code.

I see that EstateSettings.IsEstateManager() regards an owner as a manager, whilst OSSL_Api.CheckThreatLevel explicitly 
does not regards an owner as an ESTATE_MANAGER.  This is a contradiction.  The code MUST be internally consistent both 
for sanity's sake and for ANY hope that the code can document itself.

In the first instance, I would want to create EstateSettings.IsEstateManagerOrOwner() and call this where appropriate, 
with IsEstateManager only returning true for estate managers, as is proper.

On 13/04/12 15:07, Oren Hurvitz wrote:
> Regarding estate owner vs. manager: here's the existing implementation of EstateSettings.IsEstateManager():
>
>          public bool IsEstateManager(UUID avatarID)
>          {
>              if (IsEstateOwner(avatarID))
>                  return true;
>
>              return l_EstateManagers.Contains(avatarID);
>          }
>
> It explicitly adds the estate owner to the list of managers. The permission ESTATE_MANAGER should match the method
> IsEstateManager(). Therefore, it should include the estate owner.
>
> Oren
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Melanie-2 [via opensim-dev] <[hidden email]
> </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=7462795&i=0>> wrote:
>
>     Not so. ESTATE_MANAGER MEANS estate MANAGER. This is intentional. I
>     reread the code and found that it already allows a comma separated
>     list notation, so you can use ESTATE_OWNER,ESTATE_MANAGER.
>
>     This allows for finer grained control. Please understand that estate
>     owners may be significantly different from estate managers, for
>     instance in the case of a mainland. This division is useful and,
>     again, making changes could cause privilege escalation in some
>     grids. So, -1. What you want to achieve can already be achieved.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> View this message in context: Re: Remove check for IsGod in some OSSL functions
> <http://opensim-dev.2196679.n2.nabble.com/Remove-check-for-IsGod-in-some-OSSL-functions-tp7462127p7462795.html>
> Sent from the opensim-dev mailing list archive <http://opensim-dev.2196679.n2.nabble.com/> at Nabble.com.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


-- 
Justin Clark-Casey (justincc)
http://justincc.org/blog
http://twitter.com/justincc