egghelp/eggheads community

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T21:18:03-04:00

not sockets directly, but eggdrop's built-in async I/O socket wrapper ([connect], [control], [listen]), which of course is basically the same but a little bit more convenient

Statistics: Posted by demond — Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:18 pm

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T20:56:19-04:00

nice script demond .. are we using sockets here?

I think I will stick with a dedicated bot though .. it seems a little bit more manageable.

Statistics: Posted by knifebunny — Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:56 pm

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T20:48:50-04:00

you are on the right track ([newchanban] + [pushmode +b])

on a side note, there is no need of dedicated "detector" bot, let alone communicating via PRIVMSG; see spambuster.tcl for inspiration

Statistics: Posted by demond — Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:48 pm

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T20:38:43-04:00

thinking now the only way to do it is keep the hub bot op'd, and setup some sort of system where it will accept a privmsg ban from a non op'd bot, and set the ban globally (via the botnet) and in the channel locally with a +b mode

make it do a newchanban, then pushmode the +b ..

Suggestions on how to make this secure?

sorry for excessive posts, im getting excited about solving this!

Statistics: Posted by knifebunny — Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:38 pm

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T20:33:36-04:00

just to let you know, i tried the "sticky" trick with newchanban, the op'd bot recognises it as a sticky ban and keeps it in the internal ban list that way, but doesnt actually go as far as setting the +b mode

Statistics: Posted by knifebunny — Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:33 pm

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T20:27:44-04:00

the reason behind it is because a lot of spam on the network at the moment involves a compromised host joining then parting the channel with the /names list and spamming everyone from outside of the channel. I was hoping to have the non-op'd bot sit in a few other large channels to grab these nicks and ban them in the channel before they get the chance to cycle through our channel .. Hence why I need it to set the +b before they even make it there.

There isnt a problem collecting the nicks that are doing it, its just a matter of making it set the +b the way I want it, which would stop them getting the /names list in the first place.

Makes sense?

Statistics: Posted by knifebunny — Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:27 pm

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T11:21:21-04:00

what's the point of setting a channel ban if it doesn't match anyone currently on channel? if that's a sticky bot ban, it will be enforced when necessary and it will remain set on channel anyway

Statistics: Posted by demond — Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:21 am

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T09:19:43-04:00

if it unsticks after 5 seconds though .. wont the bot then just -b the ban? or would the ban expire later on?

Statistics: Posted by knifebunny — Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:19 am

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T09:18:29-04:00

in that case making the ban sticky and unstick it after 5sec or so might really be the best idea. however, i would encourage you to enable dynamic bans again, since the bots would not remove them else.

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:18 am

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T09:16:48-04:00

im thinking if i cant get it to work via that method, i might perhaps make the non-op'd bot /msg the op'd bot with some sort of command to set a ban .. i just figured botnet userfile sharing would have done it for me

Statistics: Posted by knifebunny — Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:16 am

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T09:15:02-04:00

it receives it, and will activate the ban IF someone on the channel matches it. I want it to set the +b in the channel anyway, even if noone in the channel matches it.

So, looking at .bans all, I see the bans there. But it just wont set the +b mode in the channel, which is where I am stuck.

Doesnt seem to be a ban sharing issue at all, just whether or not it decides to set +b in the channel as the ban is set.

Statistics: Posted by knifebunny — Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:15 am

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T09:12:45-04:00

does the bot recieve the new ban, or does it just not set the ban?
if you cant get it working, you might want to rename newchanban and make your own newchanban proc which will forward the ban through the tradional way of botnet.

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:12 am

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T09:10:04-04:00

yeah, the bans share over userfile sharing, however the bot issuing the 'global ban' isnt opped, so the ban is sharing to the op'd bot, but the op'd bot isnt actually setting the +b mode in the channel

Statistics: Posted by knifebunny — Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:10 am

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T09:08:23-04:00

timers will stack until you run out of memory .
However, arent bans supposed to be shared via userfile sharing and not via netbots? therefore you might want to check the sharing direction (which bot shares passiv and which aggresively) ^-^

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:08 am

netbots help; pushing +b's through botnet

2005-10-02T09:01:11-04:00

figured id use the forum to try and answer my own questions seems like this is a tough one to answer ..

so ive worked out with newchanban, there's an option you can append "sticky" to it, and it will make the ban sticky .. so could i just, within the same proc, run a timer from there that say, after 60 minutes, unsticks the ban?

because a timer would be getting called a lot, because of all the spams, are the timers going to override themselves?

how would I code this?

Statistics: Posted by knifebunny — Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:01 am