View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0001815 | unreal | ircd | public | 2004-05-14 09:47 | 2004-05-14 15:00 |
| Reporter | Special_ | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | closed | Resolution | open | ||
| Summary | 0001815: Cannot ban *\*!*@* | ||||
| Description | When trying to ban all nicknames with \ in them, I found that the ban does not work. | ||||
| Additional Information | (07:42:21) —› mode: (Special) sets (+b *\*!*@*) (07:42:25) —› part: (Test\) ([email protected]) () (07:42:26) —› join: (Test\) ([email protected]) | ||||
| 3rd party modules | |||||
|
|
Try: +b *\\*!*@* No, I didn't invent it :p. It's useless for nick!user@host bans (it allows you to escape '?' and '*' but these are never allowed) but... for some extended bans it makes sense (~r [realname], ~c [channel]). |
|
|
codemastr: perhaps worth adding a 005 thingy for this? (or any other opinions?) |
|
|
I see no reason to add a 005 numeric for this. Read RFC2812. Granted, Unreal does not claim compliance with 2812, but we do follow this part. RFC2812 Section 2.5: For string matching purposes, the protocol allows the use of two special characters: '?' (%x3F) to match one and only one character, and '*' (%x2A) to match any number of any characters. These two characters can be escaped using the character '\' (%x5C). That clearly says escaping is allowed, and that we are handling the maskes he pasted correctly. So I don't see any reason to add this to 005. |
|
|
Ok, looked a bit more into it... \ does indeed not always have to be escaped to \\, coz +b Blah\!*@* will just ban 'Blah\'. What I ment was that there's no way to tell if \ should be escaped to \\ in those special cases, like on unreal yes.. on [recent] bahamut/hybrid no.. etc.. (eg.. 30 clones join with Clone\1, Clone\2, etc.. then +b Clone\\*!*@* should be used and not Clone\*!*@*). Now whatever a RFC says.. it's confusing for clients/users. Anyway, as said earlier, I thought it affected more, now I see it's just in a few cases so perhaps it's not worth adding a token then. On a sidenote, I didn't say I was against escaping, I even said it makes sense for some extended ban types :P. |
