View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0002978unrealircdpublic2015-07-09 19:55
ReporterdjGrrr Assigned Tosyzop  
PrioritynormalSeveritytweakReproducibilityN/A
Status closedResolutionfixed 
Product Version3.2.6 
Summary0002978: a little more to the cloaked host channel bans
Descriptioni really like the idea of being able to use the cloaked host for bans, but there is something its lacking.

Its not possible to use a ip based cloaked host for users who have a reverse dns:

ie. if your cloaked host is generated like this:
rox-ACB17294.isp.com
then u can't be banned by an cloaked ip ban like this:
341C6CEC.8FC6128B.303AEBC6.IP

just as the normal ip is checked against the ban list regardless of if the user has a hostname, i think it would be really great if it also checked cloaked ip hosts, because you can do more exteneded bans with them like (from the docs):
If a user has the IP 1.2.3.4 his cloaked host could be 341C6CEC.8FC6128B.303AEBC6.IP.
If you ban *!*@341C6CEC.8FC6128B.303AEBC6.IP you would ban *!*@1.2.3.4 (obvious...)
If you ban *!*@*.8FC6128B.303AEBC6.IP you ban *!*@1.2.3.*
If you ban *!*@*.303AEBC6.IP you ban *!*@1.2.*

Although this would likely be more mainly used by opers who have some way to generate the cloaked ip, i think it would be really good, it would allow the use of cloaked ip or subnet bans (maybe for someone who is ban evading, by slightly changing ip) where you don't want to reveal the persons ip address (or subnet) to everyone.
3rd party modules

Activities

JasonTik

2006-06-17 09:42

reporter   ~0011973

This would be awesome if it came with a command to cloak an IP or hostname. It would also be helpful, with this, to put a cloaked IP in whois, along with the cloaked hostname.

aquanight

2006-06-18 14:33

reporter   ~0011976

The /userip command returns the cloaked IP to nonopers, iirc.

JasonTik

2006-06-18 20:02

reporter   ~0011984

Aquanight: I want something that will return the cloaked IP or host to anyone, even an oper if requested. That way an oper can still ban an IP from a channel without revealing it to the users.

djGrrr

2006-08-22 17:24

reporter   ~0012210

sorry for bumping this up, but i would really like to see this feature added to the next release if possible, it would be quite usefull in conditions where u don't want to network ban a user with a dynamic ip, but you want to keep them out of a channel, without revealing anything of their ip.

I'd really like to know what others think about this, especially some of the coders :)

tabrisnet

2006-08-22 21:48

reporter   ~0012219

Maybe the CLOAKHOST module should be integrated... tho that does require an extra step to make work.

djGrrr

2006-08-22 21:53

reporter   ~0012220

I'm not sure what you mean by that :S

tabrisnet

2006-08-22 22:02

reporter   ~0012221

the cloakhost module, provides a cmd, by which you give it a realhost or IP addr, and it hands back to the user the cloaked hostname/IP.

clearly this would require more steps than merely including the cloaked IP in the WHOIS, or in a dedicated command.

djGrrr

2006-08-22 22:07

reporter   ~0012222

oohhh, yes, i know all that, i wrote a bot for making cloaked hosts/ips, so the ability to create the host is not such a big deal, and i think the cloaked host in /whois would be bad, would cause unnecessary cpu load on a /whois (even if oper only)

I'd simply like the ability to use cloaked ip bans for anyone, regardless of if they have a hostname associated with the ip or not; any extra commands or whatever for getting a cloaked host/ip would simply be a benefit :)

JasonTik

2006-08-24 10:09

reporter   ~0012226

Aren't cloaked hosts stored in memory, so they dont need to be recomputed every time a user joins/parts/kicks/kicked/modes/topics/msgs/notices/etcs?

There wouldn't be any CPU impact from having to recompute the cloakedhost for opers, because it's stored.

djGrrr

2006-08-24 11:07

reporter   ~0012230

i don't know about that, but even if it is, I'm sure its possible to store the clocked ip host as well.

JasonTik

2006-08-27 21:52

reporter   ~0012253

Storing the cloaked IP is rather annoying, because it does increase memory usage per user. Recomputing it each time would increase CPU usage though, so it's a tradeoff if this feature is implemented. Though: Isn't cloakedip checked for bans, so wouldnt it need to be stored anyhow, in which case there would be no additional memory usage.

aquanight

2006-08-27 23:01

reporter   ~0012256

cloaked ip isn't checked unless you are just cloaked with no rdns. It's just realip, realhost, cloakedhost, virthost.

djGrrr

2006-09-17 10:53

reporter   ~0012401

since /userip returns cloaked ip to non-opers, regardless of if they have a rdns or not, unreal must be storing the cloaked ip somewhere in memory...

unless of course it generates it on every call to /userip, in which case this could be a NASTY DoS bug if used by many people at the same time on a server with slow (or overloaded) hardware, either way, it only makes sense to store the cloaked ip in ram, regardless of rdns, that way /cloakip would not be able to slow down the server, and cloaked ip bans could work much more efectively

JasonTik

2006-09-17 17:30

reporter   ~0012402

Last edited: 2006-09-18 14:22

Aquanight: You are correct. That is not currently the case. That is why it is the subject of this feature request.

This is called severe topic drift ;)

Shining Phoenix

2007-06-24 20:54

reporter   ~0014413

*bump*

I wanted to ban a guy with just one ban, so I banned his IP. Bad. The next day I deopered, /whowas to find out his .IP and resolved hostmasks, and then banned those. Being able to just ban the .IP mask would save trouble.

JasonTik

2008-03-17 17:06

reporter   ~0015230

I would really love to see this come in some time soon. Even if it goes into 3.3, it'd be nice to have it back ported too, even just as a patch we could apply at our leisure. I thought, for some reason, that this was fixed in 3.2.7, but found today that that appears not to be the case, when a user whose host resolves sporadically walked right through a ban.

syzop

2015-07-09 19:55

administrator   ~0018462

Hmmm although this could be done, I think it's fine the way it is.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2006-06-17 00:50 djGrrr New Issue
2006-06-17 09:42 JasonTik Note Added: 0011973
2006-06-18 14:33 aquanight Note Added: 0011976
2006-06-18 20:02 JasonTik Note Added: 0011984
2006-08-22 17:24 djGrrr Note Added: 0012210
2006-08-22 21:48 tabrisnet Note Added: 0012219
2006-08-22 21:53 djGrrr Note Added: 0012220
2006-08-22 22:02 tabrisnet Note Added: 0012221
2006-08-22 22:07 djGrrr Note Added: 0012222
2006-08-24 10:09 JasonTik Note Added: 0012226
2006-08-24 11:07 djGrrr Note Added: 0012230
2006-08-27 21:52 JasonTik Note Added: 0012253
2006-08-27 23:01 aquanight Note Added: 0012256
2006-09-17 10:53 djGrrr Note Added: 0012401
2006-09-17 17:30 JasonTik Note Added: 0012402
2006-09-18 14:22 JasonTik Note Edited: 0012402
2007-04-27 03:58 stskeeps Status new => acknowledged
2007-06-24 20:54 Shining Phoenix Note Added: 0014413
2008-03-17 17:06 JasonTik Note Added: 0015230
2015-07-09 19:55 syzop Note Added: 0018462
2015-07-09 19:55 syzop Status acknowledged => closed
2015-07-09 19:55 syzop Assigned To => syzop
2015-07-09 19:55 syzop Resolution open => fixed