Difference between revisions of "Web Textures"

From Second Life Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(prosencons)
Line 25: Line 25:
The client could prompt the first time you encounter a web texture, and ask you if you want to enable it, warning you that it will expose your IP address to third parties.  This would be similar to the way parcel streaming media prompts the first time you encounter a parcel with it set.
The client could prompt the first time you encounter a web texture, and ask you if you want to enable it, warning you that it will expose your IP address to third parties.  This would be similar to the way parcel streaming media prompts the first time you encounter a parcel with it set.
*Con: The user is asked to make technical decisions they might not understand.
*Con: The user is asked to make technical decisions they might not understand.
*Con: The user must sacrifice all dynamic web content to get privacy for their IP.
*Pro: No annoyance for those who don't care about exposing IP associations.


==Proxy Options==
==Proxy Options==
The client would provide a place to enter a HTTP proxy address for web textures.  This would allow the user to enter an anonymizing proxy service if they want to.
The client would provide a place to enter a HTTP proxy address for web textures.  This would allow the user to enter an anonymizing proxy service if they want to.
*Pro: Easy to implement
*Con: None?


==Dialog boxes==
==Dialog boxes==
The highest risk is when using web textures on a HUD.  The client could pop up some sort of dialog when attaching a HUD with web textures, asking if you want to allow the HUD to use them.  Alternatively this could be done through the normal LSL permission system with a permission request, and something like PERMISSION_TEXTURE_URL.
The highest risk is when using web textures on a HUD.  The client could pop up some sort of dialog when attaching a HUD with web textures, asking if you want to allow the HUD to use them.  Alternatively this could be done through the normal LSL permission system with a permission request, and something like PERMISSION_TEXTURE_URL.
*Pro: More fined grained control
*Con: The user is asked to make technical decisions they might not understand.
*Con: More Complex to implement.


==White/Black List==
==White/Black List==
Line 38: Line 45:
*Con: The user is asked to make technical decisions they might not understand.
*Con: The user is asked to make technical decisions they might not understand.
*Con: The user might be tricked, they might not know who to trust.
*Con: The user might be tricked, they might not know who to trust.
*Con: Very complex to implement, UI elements hard to design effectively.
*Con: Reinstalling could lose settings.


==Change Users Privacy Expectation==
==Change Users Privacy Expectation==
Make it clear to the users that their IP address association with their avatar name is not private information and can't be protected while still providing dynamic and seamless integration with the rest of the Internet.
Make it clear to the users that their IP address association with their avatar name is not private information and can't be protected while still providing dynamic and seamless integration with the rest of the Internet.
 
Pro: No technical implementation necessary.
Con: Not easy.


[[Category:Feature Requests]]
[[Category:Feature Requests]]

Revision as of 23:39, 25 January 2007

Summary

This page is about dynamic web textures, a feature to allow an LSL script to assign an image URL to a face and cause it to dynamically update from the script.

This raises a potential issue regarding Expected Privacy. The only practical way to accomplish dynamic web textures is to let the client download the image directly. This will expose user's IP addresses.

Benefits of this feature

  1. Negates the need for scripts like XyText that are very laggy when dynamic displays are large.
  2. Allows for things like streaming news service HUDs.
  3. Interactive games can present large amounts of off-world data.
  4. Corporations that already have many dynamic web assets can reuse them in-world.
  5. Live porn.
  6. Web Cams.

Potential LSL implementation

llSetTextureURL(integer face, string url);
llRefreshTextureURL(integer face);

Suggested Privacy Protections

Because this feature would expose the IP address of an agent in a way that could identify the agent, especially on a HUD, several suggestion were made to enhance privacy protections. They are listed in order of least effort to implement to most effort.

Global on/off, with one time dialog opt-in

The client could prompt the first time you encounter a web texture, and ask you if you want to enable it, warning you that it will expose your IP address to third parties. This would be similar to the way parcel streaming media prompts the first time you encounter a parcel with it set.

  • Con: The user is asked to make technical decisions they might not understand.
  • Con: The user must sacrifice all dynamic web content to get privacy for their IP.
  • Pro: No annoyance for those who don't care about exposing IP associations.

Proxy Options

The client would provide a place to enter a HTTP proxy address for web textures. This would allow the user to enter an anonymizing proxy service if they want to.

  • Pro: Easy to implement
  • Con: None?

Dialog boxes

The highest risk is when using web textures on a HUD. The client could pop up some sort of dialog when attaching a HUD with web textures, asking if you want to allow the HUD to use them. Alternatively this could be done through the normal LSL permission system with a permission request, and something like PERMISSION_TEXTURE_URL.

  • Pro: More fined grained control
  • Con: The user is asked to make technical decisions they might not understand.
  • Con: More Complex to implement.

White/Black List

Similar to Firefox/IE popup blocking, the client could manage white/black lists.

  • Pro: Flexible and complete control
  • Con: This would cause a lot of user input/prompting required for someone flying over the mainland, for example.
  • Con: The user is asked to make technical decisions they might not understand.
  • Con: The user might be tricked, they might not know who to trust.
  • Con: Very complex to implement, UI elements hard to design effectively.
  • Con: Reinstalling could lose settings.

Change Users Privacy Expectation

Make it clear to the users that their IP address association with their avatar name is not private information and can't be protected while still providing dynamic and seamless integration with the rest of the Internet. Pro: No technical implementation necessary. Con: Not easy.