View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0003498 | unreal | ircd | public | 2007-08-03 21:59 | 2010-07-14 20:51 |
| Reporter | TehRes | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | normal | Severity | tweak | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | closed | Resolution | no change required | ||
| Product Version | 3.2-beta8 | ||||
| Summary | 0003498: secure connection checks done by m_mode, m_join, and m_samode (channelmode 'z') | ||||
| Description | though you can add usermode +z to all users in a particular channel (or any user for that matter) and then set that channel itself +z, or have that user join the +z channel, you cannot SAJOIN a user in the same fashion, as m_sajoin checks for the flag itself and not the usermode as m_join and m_mode do. I don't think it'd cause a problem, but i found it interesting. | ||||
| Steps To Reproduce | user1 and user2. they are both in channel #achan. user1 is using SSL. user2 is not. user1 sets user2 +z through his favorite method and sends MODE #achan +z. it goes through. user2 sends PART #achan and then JOIN #achan. he rejoins the channel successfully. user2 then sends part #achan again, and user1 sends SAJOIN user2 #achan. The command doesn't go through, because user2 doesn't have the FLAGS_SSL flag, which m_join and m_mode don't check for, while m_sajoin does. | ||||
| 3rd party modules | |||||
|
|
> user1 sets user2 +z through his favorite method huh? Do you have an example of "favorite method"? |
|
|
i'm sorry, i'm used to different methods of changing usermodes due to unnecessarily large amounts of redundant (in my opinion) modules I probably should have said via SVS(2)MODE Sorry again if i was a bit vague. |
|
|
+z/+Z recode stuff is on todo. I'll block SVSMODE +z/-z now though, there's no legit reason for that. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007-08-03 21:59 | TehRes | New Issue | |
| 2007-08-03 22:42 | Stealth | Note Added: 0014664 | |
| 2007-08-04 23:52 | TehRes | Note Added: 0014674 | |
| 2007-08-04 23:56 | TehRes | Note Edited: 0014674 | |
| 2010-07-14 20:51 | syzop | QA | => Not touched yet by developer |
| 2010-07-14 20:51 | syzop | U4: Need for upstream patch | => No need for upstream InspIRCd patch |
| 2010-07-14 20:51 | syzop | Note Added: 0016183 | |
| 2010-07-14 20:51 | syzop | Status | new => closed |
| 2010-07-14 20:51 | syzop | Resolution | open => no change required |
