View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000792 | unreal | ircd | public | 2003-03-11 20:59 | 2004-03-08 19:34 |
| Reporter | BiGi | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | normal | Severity | feature | Reproducibility | N/A |
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | 3.2-beta15 | ||||
| Summary | 0000792: except nick {} | ||||
| Description | Hey, Could you make something like a except nick { mask "*ident@*.cable.wanadoo.nl"; }; or something? So I can qline the nick, but anyone matching the host can still use the nick? | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| 3rd party modules | |||||
|
|
[changed title] |
|
|
Ok I'm bring this suggestion back from the dead because I wish something like this could make it into the final release of 3.2, such feature would make the package complete on the 3.2 series IMHO, Sometimes you'll find yourself needing to forbid some nicks and it will always be someone affected that you would wish you could allow them to use their nicks. I know something like this has been suggested by others, but it seems it has always gone unoticed :( |
|
|
opered with sufficient privilueges overrules Qlined nicks??? why any additional "feature" - opers can (i had +N and don't tested it with minor flags) - and others don't and they MUST NOT use them - otherwise these nicks needn't be Qlined... just my opinion ;) |
|
|
medice I think you missed the WHOLE point! The idea is not intended to make things easy for IRC Operators, but for users, Let me give you a simple example where this would be needed and that has happened on our network. A few script kiddies started to create nicks such us NlckServ, NewsServ and all sort of things that contain 'Serv' as part of it to deceive users, so we were forced to place a SQLINE on *S*E*R*V* to stop this once and for all, now we have several users complaining they cant user their nicks, nicks such us: "Love-Servant" "Servant" "Servantino" and so on, and so on. This is JUST one example, We have have been on that same situation several times with other words and nicks. Im sure other people here would agree with me that such feature would be good so that innocent users are not affected by the bad guys actions. edited on: 11-17-03 20:08 |
|
|
> so we were forced to place a SQLINE on *S*E*R*V* I don't agree that you said "we were forced". If your users want, they will always find nicknames you don't want them to use, while other users will still attempt to connect with a nickname like "Reservation", "AirServInternational", "ServAtron", "Observer", "Conservancy", etc. Even if you tried, couldn't find all the nickname exceptions that contain "Serv". Instead of thinking about except nick blocks, I would suggest to sqline only specific nicknames, like "NlckServ", and keep the others (fe. NewsServ), since they don't abuse anything, but don't place an sqline on *S*E*R*V*, it's so stupid. What if someone uses nick A______, you don't like it, but it's the user's favourite nickname? Why should your users think by default if a *Ṡerv joins a channel it must be a Service? I believe SQLINE is rather to deny using very bad words in nicknames and some other serious things. |
|
|
This was added in RC2, I just forgot to document: except tkl { mask user@host; type qline; /* or gqline for global */ }; |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2003-11-16 23:57 | AI | Note Added: 0004046 | |
| 2003-11-17 10:05 | medice | Note Added: 0004050 | |
| 2003-11-17 20:07 | AI | Note Added: 0004051 | |
| 2003-11-17 20:08 | AI | Note Edited: 0004051 | |
| 2003-11-18 07:30 | AngryWolf | Note Added: 0004058 | |
| 2004-03-08 19:34 |
|
Status | new => resolved |
| 2004-03-08 19:34 |
|
Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2004-03-08 19:34 |
|
Assigned To | => codemastr |
| 2004-03-08 19:34 |
|
Note Added: 0005375 |
