View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0003984unrealircdpublic2020-01-10 12:00
Reporterwarg Assigned Tosyzop  
Status resolvedResolutionfixed 
Product Version3.2.9-RC1 
Fixed in Version5.0.2 
Summary0003984: TKL exemption for SSL certificates. (requested by Veil).
Description<%Veil> oo oo
<%Veil> could we add compatability for except tkl's with ssl certificates?
<&warg> great feature suggestion
<%Veil> :)
<&warg> where IP/hostnames tend to be dynamic, SSL certificates can be very very static.
<&warg> That can't happen until 3.2.10 at least though, because 3.2.9 is on freeze I believe. I'll bug it as a feature request.
TagsNo tags attached.
3rd party modules



2010-12-24 18:07

reporter   ~0016509

I do like this suggestion, and it should be expanded to the except ban block as well.

This should not be too hard to implement as Unreal already has cert checking, however this probably would not work for exceptions on (g)Z:Lines since the connection is aborted before any information is processed.


2010-12-29 18:28

administrator   ~0016533

Sounds like a good idea (and Stealth's remark is correct)


2015-07-13 22:24

administrator   ~0018491

bump. post-beta1.


2020-01-10 12:00

administrator   ~0021220

This can now be done via

commit 596cf8e7defb6f2a606e5ca5aad51da9d7843a29
Author: Bram Matthys <>
Date: Fri Jan 10 11:18:05 2020 +0100

    New: extended server bans: exempt by certificate fingerprint and SASL account.
    Examples with ELINE:
    /ELINE ~a:TrustedAccount kg 0 This user can bypass kline/gline when using SASL
    /ELINE ~S:1234567890abcdef1234567890abcdef1234567890abcdef1234567890abcdef kgf 0 Trusted user with this certificate fingerprint
    It also works with bans, although this would be less common:
    /GLINE ~a:EvilAccount
    A more useful purpose would be to use ~r (realname):
    /GLINE ~r:*some*stupid*real*name*
    (Although you could already ban realnames via spamfilter 'u')
    For third party module coders:
    If you have an extban in group 3 (a "matcher"-extban) then you
    can opt-in to support this. You do so at extban registration time:
    req.options = EXTBOPT_TKL;
    or, if you already had another flag set, like for +I, then:
    req.options = EXTBOPT_INVEX|EXTBOPT_TKL;
    In any case, you set the .options before you call ExtbanAdd().
    Note that if you do indicate support then your is_ok function
    will be called like:
    extban->is_ok(client, NULL, mask, EXBCHK_PARAM, MODE_ADD, EXBTYPE_TKL);
    Important here is the NULL channel (since there is none)
    Similarly your is_banned function will be called with BANCHK_CONNECT:
    extban->is_banned(client, NULL, banstr, BANCHK_JOIN, &msg, &errmsg);
    Here too, it is important to note that channel is NULL.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2010-12-24 00:49 warg New Issue
2010-12-24 18:07 Stealth Note Added: 0016509
2010-12-29 18:28 syzop Note Added: 0016533
2010-12-29 18:28 syzop Assigned To => syzop
2010-12-29 18:28 syzop Status new => confirmed
2010-12-29 18:29 syzop Assigned To syzop =>
2015-07-13 22:24 syzop Note Added: 0018491
2020-01-10 12:00 syzop Assigned To => syzop
2020-01-10 12:00 syzop Status confirmed => resolved
2020-01-10 12:00 syzop Resolution open => fixed
2020-01-10 12:00 syzop Fixed in Version => 5.0.2
2020-01-10 12:00 syzop Note Added: 0021220