... verify always works, whether your X info is invisible or not.
One thing I would possibly suggest is having it say 'User is logged in to
X' instead of actually quoting the username.
Mark.
At 23:55 18/04/02 -0400, you wrote:
>You can however, hide yourself a little by doing:
>
>/msg x set i
You can however, hide yourself a little by doing:
/msg x set invisible
so
-> *x* info
is
-X- Unable to view user details (Invisible)
instead of:
-X- Information about: (#)
-X- Currently logged on via:
-X- nick!ident@host
-X- Language: 1
-X- INVISIBLE is Off
-X- LAST SEEN: 0 days, 00:07
begin quote from Nemo on Apr 18, 2002:
> Kindly remove the new "feature" that displays one's username in a /whois results.
> This is an open invitation to attacks and an invasion of privacy. I thought that
> security was supposed to be INCREASED not thrown wide open. Please think this one
> over
Hi,
Anyone can find your username by typing /msg x verify nick. The new
"feature" merely cuts out an additional step. Knowing a nick's username
actually helps with security as a /whois can be spoofed but not a person's
username. Knowing your friend's username, and being able to match your
friend's
Attacks? If you type /msg x verify it will say if youre logged in as
a given username.
What difference does it make?
*sigh*
At 20:07 18/04/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Kindly remove the new "feature" that displays one's username in a /whois
>results.
>This is an open invitation to attacks and an inva
u said what u think we read it.
indeed to repeat the same in 5 mails.
thanks .
i talk for my self not for @undernet.org.
Friendly Neowatch @ Undernet
open invitation to attacks and an invasion of privacy ??
thats a usefull command better than the verify one FYI u can't hide that
verify because anyone can find it by /msg x verify nick and he can know your
username if u are logged in
Friendly NeoWatch @ Undernet
Kindly remove the new "feature" that displays one's username in a /whois results.
This is an open invitation to attacks and an invasion of privacy. I thought that
security was supposed to be INCREASED not thrown wide open. Please think this one
over again. No op I know is for this.
Nemo288
@#win
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 02:32:46PM +0100, Chris Crowther wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Chojin wrote:
>
> > I mean fingerprint is a sort a computer id and if I gline a users with
> > *@*.aol.com with his fingeprint, even if user changes his IP (with isp
> > reconnection) he is still glined because
On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Alocin wrote:
> I'm curious... Theoricaly.. would there be a way to retreive the mac
> address?
The MAC address of the sending host is only available on the same
LAN (or VLAN) as the sending host. Plus dialup nodes don't have MAC
addresses - not real ones anyway, th
Nope,
some restrictions, i compiled it as root and it's working fine now :P
- Original Message -
From: "Kev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Daniël Boeije" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Coder-Com] 'Virtual memory exhausted'-error
> I'm curious... Theoricaly.. would there be a way to retreive the mac
> address?
Only if you're on the same network as the other end of the connection.
--
Kevin L. Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I was busy compiling slackware on a PIII 1000mhz with 512mb RAM and 1gb
> swapspace. Then i got this error:
Looks like you were compiling gnuworld, not slackware :P My guess is that
your version of g++ has some sort of bug...
--
Kevin L. Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> OK, I see what you're talking about now, but how would you go
> about generating a fingerprint? Baring in mind that we have no access to
> their local system to use details such as CPU ID...and we likely never
> will have either (I'm not sure I'd want that information from the users).
>
>
> Seriously, what are the chances in this?
>
> I'm figuring that happened, because we both joined at EXACTLY the same time,
> wonder why zeu got precedence over ops? heh
Because it wasn't *exactly* the same time--zeu's CREATE had a slightly
earlier timestamp than yours. Your server received hi
Heya,
I was busy compiling slackware on a PIII 1000mhz with 512mb RAM and 1gb
swapspace. Then i got this error:
/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-slackware-linux/2.95.3/../../../../include/g++-3/stl_t
ree.h: In instantiation of
`_Rb_tree,__default_alloc_templat
e >,pair,__default_alloc_template
>,int>,_Select
On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Carlo Wood wrote:
> Basically that means that all users have to register somehow somewhere
> and practically it means that a working e-mail adress is thrown into
> the equation for authentication.
Well we have that with the channel service, with the +r mode we
could
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Chojin wrote:
> I mean fingerprint is a sort a computer id and if I gline a users with
> *@*.aol.com with his fingeprint, even if user changes his IP (with isp
> reconnection) he is still glined because his fingerprint is glined. Other
> users from aol can join.
OK,
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 03:41:20PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> Perhaps he means something like my EAID.
Err, AID... The EAID (Encoded Authentication ID) is only given
out to grant priviledges to people. But the AID can be used
for banning without actually _getting_ the AID (which would
be bad bec
Seriously, what are the chances in this?
I'm figuring that happened, because we both joined at EXACTLY the same time,
wonder why zeu got precedence over ops? heh
*shrug* - It interested me. heh
[23:47] *** Now talking in #123-test
[23:47] *** zeu ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) has joined #123-test
[23:47]
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Chojin wrote:
> > What exactly do you mean by fingerprint? You can set klines and
> > bans on masks such as *@*.aol.com already.
> >
>
> I mean fingerprint is a sort a computer id and if I gline a users with
> *@*.aol.com with his fingeprint, even if user changes his IP (wit
on 18/4/02 06:15, Chojin at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Chris Crowther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Chojin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 8:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [Coder-Com] Ban/Kill with fingerprint
>
>
>> On
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Crowther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Chojin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Coder-Com] Ban/Kill with fingerprint
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Chojin wrote:
>
> > what about ban/kill using fingerp
23 matches
Mail list logo
