egghelp/eggheads community

questions about a banmaskscript

2005-02-26T08:01:29-04:00

You might want to take a look at this as well, if you are trying to make a banmask selector:

http://forum.egghelp.org/viewtopic.php?t=8741

Statistics: Posted by awyeah — Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:01 am

questions about a banmaskscript

2005-02-25T00:32:39-04:00

- mhh. never heared about but thanks for the tip.

this suggestion is because of this:
http://www.eggheads.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=423
I dont know if there could be also problems just the other way with ~, but I believe it's best to avoid problems, before they even occur .

now just the question how can i detect ip`s?

best done with a regular expression:
http://forum.egghelp.org/viewtopic.php?t=4319
http://www.tcl.tk/man/tcl8.4/TclCmd/re_syntax.htm

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:32 am

questions about a banmaskscript

2005-02-24T21:18:06-04:00

you can probably save some code using switch and regexp, but it probably won't reduce execution time.
- mhh, ok.

But I would recommned you to use || in the if expression, if the if-body will be the same anyway.
- ok

btw. you dont need :: before BUZAout, you already included the var in the global line.
- right, my error.

oh yes, why do you want to use error!*@* as error ident? i would recommed using -1 for errors (read tcl man for how to "return" errors for more details).
- i know. this is only for my self. if 1 proc call those banmask proc with a wrong host because i don`t think about everthing (user not longer on channel) and i would never set +b *!*@ or something. just a little protection.

PS: your bot might get into trouble when comparing the string ~ within a ban, I just wrote a script within I had to replace it with ? like [string map {~ ?} $uhost].
- mhh. never heared about but thanks for the tip.

now just the question how can i detect ip`s?

Statistics: Posted by Burke — Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:18 pm

questions about a banmaskscript

2005-02-24T04:02:07-04:00

you can probably save some code using switch and regexp, but it probably won't reduce execution time.
But I would recommned you to use || in the if expression, if the if-body will be the same anyway.
btw. you dont need :: before BUZAout, you already included the var in the global line.
oh yes, why do you want to use error!*@* as error ident? i would recommed using -1 for errors (read tcl man for how to "return" errors for more details).

PS: your bot might get into trouble when comparing the string ~ within a ban, I just wrote a script within I had to replace it with ? like [string map {~ ?} $uhost].

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Thu Feb 24, 2005 4:02 am

questions about a banmaskscript

2005-02-24T01:03:56-04:00

hi

i tryed to make a little script.
this will be called in some other procs with
get:ban:mask "$BUZAin"
and $BUZAin will be always nick!ident@host.

Code:

proc get:ban:mask { BUZAin } {global ipbanhosts BUZAout botnick botnameputlog "get:ban:mask -- eingangsmask -- $BUZAin"set BUZA [lindex [split $BUZAin "!"] 1]set ::BUZAout "*!$BUZA"if {[string match "*.users.quakenet.org*" $BUZAin]} { set BUZA [lindex [split $BUZAin "@"] 1] ; set ::BUZAout "*!*@$BUZA" }if {[string match "*@*proxad*" $BUZAin]} { set BUZA [lindex [split $BUZAin "@"] 1] ; set ::BUZAout "*!*@$BUZA" }if {[string match "*@*chello*" $BUZAin]} { set BUZA [lindex [split $BUZAin "@"] 1] ; set ::BUZAout "*!*@$BUZA" }if {[string match "*@*kabelbw*" $BUZAin]} { set BUZA [lindex [split $BUZAin "@"] 1] ; set ::BUZAout "*!*@$BUZA" }if {[string match "*@*mediaways*" $BUZAin]} { set BUZA [lindex [split $BUZAin "@"] 1] ; set ::BUZAout "*!*@$BUZA" }[...........................much other.............]if {[string match $botnick $BUZAout]} { set BUZAout "error!*@*" ; putlog "proc get:ban:mask in: $BUZAin out: $BUZAout - botnick" }if {[string match $botname $BUZAout]} { set BUZAout "error!*@*" ; putlog "proc get:ban:mask in: $BUZAin out: $BUZAout - botname" }if { "*!" == $BUZAout } { set BUZAout "error!*@*" ; putlog "proc get:ban:mask in: $BUZAin out: $BUZAout - *!*@*" }if { "*!@*" == $BUZAout } { set BUZAout "error!*@*" ; putlog "proc get:ban:mask in: $BUZAin out: $BUZAout - *!*@*" }if { "*!*@*" == $BUZAout } { set BUZAout "error!*@*" ; putlog "proc get:ban:mask in: $BUZAin out: $BUZAout - *!*@*" }if { "*!*@" == $BUZAout } { set BUZAout "error!*@*" ; putlog "proc get:ban:mask in: $BUZAin out: $BUZAout - *!*@*" }if { "!*@*" == $BUZAout } { set BUZAout "error!*@*" ; putlog "proc get:ban:mask in: $BUZAin out: $BUZAout - *!*@*" }if { "*!@" == $BUZAout } { set BUZAout "error!*@*" ; putlog "proc get:ban:mask in: $BUZAin out: $BUZAout - *!*@*" }putlog "get:ban:mask -- ausgangsmask -- $BUZAout"return $BUZAout}

That should if the user is in mode +x or use a dynamic host ban *!*@host. If not, it`s mosttimes a bnc/static host and it should ban *!ident@host. Because *!*@host will match to many users which should not be affected.

Those putlogs will be removed later, for sure. Just for tests.
I think i should make it smaller but no idea how.

Next point, i need to know how can i set that every nick!ident@134.345.454.43 will be masked with *!*@ip ?

Statistics: Posted by Burke — Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:03 am