View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0002222||unreal||ircd||public||2004-12-05 06:27||2005-01-23 13:41|
|Fixed in Version||3.2.3|
|Summary||0002222: SVSMODE -b|e does not work with new extended bans.|
|Description||Well, some IRC Services use the command SVSMODE #channel -b nick or SVS2MODE #channel -b nick to delete all bans which are touching the given nick. The problem is: SVSMODE -b / SVS2MODE -b commands do not work with extended bans (it will never delete extended bans if a nick is specified).|
The same problem appears with SVSMODE -e / SVS2MODE -e commands.
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|3rd party modules|
I'm not really sure if it should?
Like if there's a ban ~c:#blah, should it be removed if user X is in #blah and you request all bans to be removed for user X? Debatable...
And stuff like ~q/~n are not 'real bans', they might even be 'policy bans' like +b ~n:*!*@*.aol.com... I'm not sure if you want those suddenly removed then (actually I would think 'no').
Removing matching ~q extbans sounds logical however, since that's a "real ban".
||i believe they shouldnt be able to touch any bans what so ever, kinda unresonable but its the same with clients and mirc, mirc doesnt detect an extended ban, i took time to make my own mirc detect a valid extended ban which effects me/ my channels im in/ my realname, i see it as agood thing, it helps stop channel take overs,|
|Yeah, actually, I considered this about a week ago. I could not think of how exactly you could make it deal with extended bans. As syzop said, many extended bans are for "policies" not to stop one user. Meaning a +b ~c:*warez* isn't meant to keep JoeUser out, it is meant to stop warez people from coming in. So most likely, you don't want that ban removed.|
mhh.. ok for extended bans, this point of view is debatable...
Other problem: I have seen today that SVSMODE -b does not unban bans placed on a IP mask. However, if you place a ban on the IP of an user, the user is not able to join the channel, so this ban works and it's a real ban :) SVSMODE -b should be able to remove bans on a IP address I think (it works with real hosts, so why not with IP address ?).
> it works with real hosts, so why not with IP address ?
No special reason whatsoever, it's just that neither codemastr nor me added that functionality (yet). Opened a new bugreport about it: 0002270
*edit* typo in bugid */edit*
Last edited: 2005-01-22 14:08
Syzop, I've reached a conclusion that this should *not* be done (for reasons we mentioned). But, I was thinking, perhaps there should be a svsmode_remove callback for the extbans? The reason is, for some extbans, it might make sense. For example I mentioned I created a ~t which works just like +b except the bans are removed after N minutes. So it would make sense for svsmode -b to remove a ~t ban. So maybe extban developers should have that option? Afaik, adding another callback wouldn't really break anything since bzero is called on the struct beforehand.
*edit: actually, we don't even really need a callback, just a flag.
Yup, sounds good (*love structs ;p*)
Also I guess we could set that flag for ~r too?
[I made a mistake in my last sentence of my first reaction dated 2004-12-05.. corrected sentence: 'Removing matching ~r extbans sounds logical however, since that's a "real ban"'.]
Unless you would call that a policy ban, but.. hm ;P
Last edited: 2005-01-22 15:52
I've never been quite sure what ~r is. It can be policy or a real ban. ~r:*fuck* is a policy ban. But ~r:*Some_guy_who_uses_the_same_realname* isn't...
*edit: Then again though, +b *fuck*!*@* is probably a policy ban too.
Well, services can handle the policy bans...
/chanserv AKICK #channel ADD ~r:*whatever*
/chanserv AKICK #channel STICK ~r:*whatever*
Since IIRC SVSMODE -b sends back the list of removed bans so services can just re-add the stickied ones.
|There is now an option, EXTBOPT_CHSVSMODE that will allow module coders to determine whether or not the extban should be affected by SVSMODE -b/-e. The only builtin one that is is ~r. The others will remain. This is added in .236|
|2004-12-05 06:27||Snake||New Issue|
|2004-12-05 11:42||syzop||Note Added: 0008504|
|2004-12-05 12:46||White_Magic||Note Added: 0008507|
||Note Added: 0008510|
|2005-01-09 10:47||Snake||Note Added: 0008747|
|2005-01-09 15:33||syzop||Note Added: 0008748|
|2005-01-09 15:34||syzop||Note Edited: 0008748|
||Note Added: 0008893|
||Note Edited: 0008893|
|2005-01-22 14:19||syzop||Note Added: 0008894|
||Note Added: 0008895|
||Note Edited: 0008895|
|2005-01-23 12:04||aquanight||Note Added: 0008897|
||Status||new => resolved|
||Fixed in Version||=> 3.2.3|
||Resolution||open => fixed|
||Assigned To||=> codemastr|
||Note Added: 0008900|