egghelp/eggheads community

Notice ban Script needed

2005-06-28T12:44:39-04:00

What difference does it make if it's a big channel or not, locking on a single notice is not so useful as it's not necessary all the time.

Statistics: Posted by Sir_Fz — Tue Jun 28, 2005 12:44 pm

Notice ban Script needed

2005-06-28T01:06:54-04:00

by the way locking channel for single notice doesnt make much sense to me, it will be better if it lock on 3rd or 4th notice.

In a big channel if you allow 3/4 notices and then you want your bot to lock the channel, does this make any sence?

Statistics: Posted by Linux — Tue Jun 28, 2005 1:06 am

Notice ban Script needed

2005-06-27T18:43:49-04:00

by the way locking channel for single notice doesnt make much sense to me, it will be better if it lock on 3rd or 4th notice.

It bans consonant nicks/numerical idents on entry.

The reference was to spam bots. Normal flood controls apply for those twits that just like to attempt flooding channels.

PS: I'm amazed at how many of these idiots use registered nicks.

Statistics: Posted by Alchera — Mon Jun 27, 2005 6:43 pm

Notice ban Script needed

2005-06-27T04:22:54-04:00

by the way locking channel for single notice doesnt make much sense to me, it will be better if it lock on 3rd or 4th notice.

That can be done using allfloodprotection

Statistics: Posted by Sir_Fz — Mon Jun 27, 2005 4:22 am

Notice ban Script needed

2005-06-27T02:21:20-04:00

by the way locking channel for single notice doesnt make much sense to me, it will be better if it lock on 3rd or 4th notice.

Statistics: Posted by Guvnor — Mon Jun 27, 2005 2:21 am

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-13T09:21:43-04:00

I use *!*ident@*.domain.com in all scripts without a drama. As for spam bots, I use a script I have especially written to cope with them. It bans consonant nicks/numerical idents on entry. As soon as they enter the channels are set +cmR, the ban set and the offender kicked. In the case of numerical idents my script emulates DALnet's ChanServ where a numerical ident like "h23f7f990@" will set a ban of *!*0*@*; the last digit in the ident else it sets *!*ident@*.domain.com, both the mode setting and ban are timed.

On average there are two innocent users per channel per 24 hr period that get banned, bot users are ignored.

Statistics: Posted by Alchera — Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:21 am

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-13T06:50:52-04:00

My Bots used to lock the channel when the channel banlist was full It rarely triggered the locking script tho. I used *!*ident@*.domain.com bans on 99% of my scripts.

Statistics: Posted by ^DooM^ — Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:50 am

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-13T06:21:31-04:00

What I was getting at was this (as an example):
* Enfield sets mode: +b *!*chindians@219.95.230.*
Only that particular user is banned. It takes into account cyber cafe's which the other method does not! I have bots in channels which are setup by users of cyber cafe's and banning an entire cyber for the error of one user is ludicrous! I also use wildcards when an actual host is shown (cybers only have non RDNS IP's).

I have found that using "nick!*@host.domain" or "nick!*user@*.domain" useless as that is the one thing a banned user will do, change nicks but they rarely change their user name (identd).

These types of bans quicky fill up the banlists especially on larger channels, as you know flood bots have a tendency to change their nicks and idents quickly and randomly so I would suggest not to include idents or nick in the banmask, only the domain and/or host.

Statistics: Posted by awyeah — Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:21 am

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-13T03:35:51-04:00

i used this:

putquick "MODE $dest +m" -next
utimer 40 [list pushmode $dest -m]

works fine.

to ban different types of hosts there are options in NoticeBan1.1 by Pulse.

thanks for the help

Statistics: Posted by Smurff — Sun Feb 13, 2005 3:35 am

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-12T17:27:19-04:00

What I was getting at was this (as an example):

* Enfield sets mode: +b *!*chindians@219.95.230.*

Only that particular user is banned. It takes into account cyber cafe's which the other method does not! I have bots in channels which are setup by users of cyber cafe's and banning an entire cyber for the error of one user is ludicrous! I also use wildcards when an actual host is shown (cybers only have non RDNS IP's).

I have found that using "nick!*@host.domain" or "nick!*user@*.domain" useless as that is the one thing a banned user will do, change nicks but they rarely change their user name (identd).

Statistics: Posted by Alchera — Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:27 pm

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-12T13:28:36-04:00

I prefer *!*user@*.domain myself, simply to be fair.

isnt fair either, because users from i.E. java chat will all be banned from same ISP. dont forget domain.host.com representats a single IP and as long its no bouncer with same vhost it will be only 1 ISP connection.

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:28 pm

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-12T10:54:07-04:00

Maskhost will definately ban a whole ISP, so its better if we just dont use it in *!*@host.domain.com types of banmasks, espcially for channels who have user limit 300+, well you can modify the banmask, thats not my concern.

So, every poor sod using the same ISP gets banned for the error of just one user?

Needless to say Alchera, I use the same script, well bit more modified according to my intentions on one of DALnet's largest populated channels, and the most flooded too. The script works fine there, no user, op, sop or anyone has complained ever.

See this stops drones from entering and kicks them, because mass join botnets mostly use notices as a tactic for flooding, so when it sees a notice from anyone wham, ban all those lamers and kick them. However yes it kicks people who perform a notice which isn't an op or voice. Everyone knows the rule no one can notice the channel except the ops/voices.

Besides even if an *!*@host gets banned, and we don't kick them there already banned? right? so they can't speak or do anything while in the channel so we might as well kick them heh.

Statistics: Posted by awyeah — Sat Feb 12, 2005 10:54 am

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-11T18:54:26-04:00

and why noone is using the built in maskhost feature is beyond me..

Statistics: Posted by greenbear — Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:54 pm

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-11T17:25:40-04:00

and everyone match that users hostmask in the format: *!*@domain.host.com.

So, every poor sod using the same ISP gets banned for the error of just one user?

I prefer *!*user@*.domain myself, simply to be fair.

Statistics: Posted by Alchera — Fri Feb 11, 2005 5:25 pm

Notice ban Script needed

2005-02-11T08:57:38-04:00

Use the one Bingooss gave. I made it for the same purpose which you wish to use it for some time earlier ago. It will basically lock the channel on a single channel notice and kick/ban the user who made the notice and everyone match that users hostmask in the format: *!*@domain.host.com.

Statistics: Posted by awyeah — Fri Feb 11, 2005 8:57 am