It is currently Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:45 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




 Page 1 of 1 [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: //mode $me -x
PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2002 9:53 pm 

Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 1
Location: earth
undernet should also add an option to unhost the undernet hoskmask.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2002 9:54 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 209
Location: UK, Cambridge
This is done to stop abuse,

If you were banned in a channel by your host , you could remove the -x and go back in the channel.

This way you have to disconnect from IRC to remove the +x flag



_________________
Image
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2003 4:34 pm 
seeing that undernet allows only one user per person .. there's no need for the -x


  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:47 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 4:16 pm
Posts: 40
Location: Larnaca, Cyprus
Ofcourse there is reason for the -x kid. As simba said, once you get banned in a channel, setting -x mode you can rejoin the channel. Also, it is a personal case that someone may decide to set -x mode either to show his location (extension *.com.cy for example).

Best Regards,



_________________
Stefano Sordini
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2003 3:41 am 
joining a channel with a different user@host after getting banned if considered ban evasion and is a major NO-NO.


  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2003 4:21 pm 

Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 6
Location: Arendal, Norway
If you ask me, I think the problem could be avoided.

If someone is banned via X, then X should know 1) the real hostname of the person who is banned 2) the username in X.

Example.

Banned (~banner@banned.users.undernet.org) does something wrong in #banned and someone forces X to do a +b *!*@banned.users.undernet.org

Banned takes away usermode +x and is now known as Banned (~banner@banned.com)

He tries to enter #banned once again, but is denied. How is that possible?

When a user enters the Undernet IRC network, before a //mode $me +x (or was it +x $me ?), the user is "naked". A read hostname can be known. In my opinion, even for X. The the user masks his host via X. Ofcourlsy it is possible for X to know 1) the real hostname 2) the username (cloaked vhost)

So, if a user is banned with +x on and the user does a mode -x $me, X should have a internal banlist which bans the user from entering the channel he was banned from.

Without saying "this is so possible, make it happend!", I think it's possible :)

Now, I want to hear why it's not possible...


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 19, 2003 6:53 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 1:07 am
Posts: 33
Location: Columbus, OH
Not all people ban using X. Infact, there's no reason to ban via X unless someone has really infringed on channel rules and you need to keep the person out. X has a limited amount of space to keep bans, so why fill it up everytime some palooka decides to be a moron? There's no real reason to be able to set mode -x. The host masking is there to protect you. Why do you want to take off the protection?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 09, 2003 9:16 am 
Well..if you are banned, then you are banned. Go talk to the person who banned you, and ask him/her to unban you or wait for them to uplift the ban. Why do you need to evade bans? Only lamers want to evade bans, 'coz they are baaaad. Nu-Hir is correct, why do you want to remove the protection. Is is there to protect you from host attacks. There should be no /mode $me -x. DC yourself don't be protected.


  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 09, 2003 5:42 pm 

Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 12:29 pm
Posts: 5
1. X will _NOT_ look beyond +x when deciding if it should set a ban or not. However, if you set a channel ban on a host, it will affect the user even if he is +x.
2. Banning the username in X (or in the channel) will have no effect whatsoever if the user sets -x, since there is no way to match the +x host with the user now -x.
3. What UnderNet _does_ need is a way to unauth from X, especially since now maxlogins is fixed to 1.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 11:30 am 
Why do you need to -x? your just removing your protection...if your logged in to the other computer. Then logged off. Why do you need to be logged in to the other computer anyway? Undernet does not need a dead connection anyway.


  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 28, 2003 2:21 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 26
Location: The Wild Blue Yonder
On the other hand, it could also be argued that if "protection" is the primary focus, then Undernet should protect all of its users, not just registered ones. Other networks with a "real" +x mode (or +v depending on the ircd in question) implement a partial hostmask on everyone, but if the user absolutely wants it off, that's his or her choice. Undernet's conditional virtual hostmask works great for what it is, but some users either don't want to use a username, or are unable to because of current bans such as much of .ro and .mk. Do they necessarily deserve less protection?

Oh btw, X does see past the +x mode to the users actual host...


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 12:32 am 

Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 435
Location: Netherlands
Uhm, sorry to say, but if you ban *!*@<userid>.users.undernet.org and the user uses -x, then he still can't join a channel, ircu matches a ban against his AC token as well. thus not allowing the user to join... even if he would set -x :)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2003 12:49 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 9:45 pm
Posts: 5
Location: .ro
I believe its when you ban *!*@realhostname.or.ip , if the user sets mode +x he still cant join the channel and not the other way around. If you ban *!*@<username>.users.undernet.org , it allows the user to disconnect and rejoin the chan ( On Undernet , at least ).

-
Talyn : If some1 wants to have his/her ip/hostname hidden then its a MUST for that person to register to CService, witch is quite easy btw. If they dont bother registering to CService then they must not be very interested in their security.
As for the domains that are blocked from registering new users to CService.. Im sure that you dont expect for some1 that abuses a free service to receive any help on how to improve their security ( this is like an invitation for them to abuse more ). If not all of them are abusers then the *non-abusers* can ask for help from officials by irc or mail.

-

I find the "-x" command useless since you can disconnect to unhide your ip.
This command would bring only more abuse to the servers and its clients. FloodBots can evade bans on their *.users.undernet.org hosts by doing -x. Im sure script-kiddies would love this command, since they wont disconnect their bots and have them reconnected just for a ban evasion.

Just think about it... do you really need this command ?

-


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2003 2:15 pm 

Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 435
Location: Netherlands
No ender, if you ban a +x host, the user is unable to rejoin using -x, he will need to /quit, not auth to X and is then able to join. If you ban someone on his true hostmask, then the user will be unable to join, even if he's set +x. ircu checks against both masks in this case.

The reason why -x has been disabled is because if someone sets +x, the server emulates a quit with reason (Registered), rejoins him in all channels and resets the mode's through the server. Imagine how it looks for users in a channel if a bunch of drones using accounts would join a channel, set +x, then set -x and would keep doing that ?

For other users this would look like a joinflood. And THATS the reason why -x has been disabled, nothing else.



_________________
Don't bother reading, I'm just the lame botlender, right ?
Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 1 [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: