On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:37 AM, canyonknight <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Alexander Griesbaum <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Daniel Wallace < > [email protected] > >> wrote: > > > >> Hello, > >> I have been having to deal with some idiot who is pissed off in the aur > >> for some reason. He keeps marking all my packages out of date. And > >> somehow he is able to continually do this even after I have suspended > >> his account. I am not sure if this is because of the cookie still > >> working and him still being logged in. > >> > >> Would it be possible to add captchas to flag packages out of date, or to > >> make it so that suspending an account kills the cookie? > > > > > > > > Maybe I missed something... > > I want to get back to the fact, that the user could flag packages after > he > > was suspended. In January, canyonknight committed a patch for this > > specific problem[1]: > > "A suspended user can stay in active sessions. Introduce new function > > delete_user_sessions to remove all open sessions for a specific user. > > Allows suspensions to take effect immediately." > > Yes, that patch should immediately suspend a user account. There > hasn't been a new AUR release since that was committed, so I don't > believe it was applied to the official AUR setup. > Ah you're right, didn't check that. So THIS issue will be solved with the next release I guess. > Thanks for confirming that my patch works! > You're welcome. -- IP banning sounds nice, but is this often needed? I don't know how many spammers are there in a month/ a year. Perhaps it would measure up the needs if one make flagging many packages in a very short time as hard as possible and have the possibility to roll back user actions easily. I don't know if this whole thing of abusing rights is a huge problem at all, I'm new to this.
