well i'd love to see a g:line for 1 day for an IP that is abusing on the
instance of
1) excessive clonage
2) spamming
3) abusive botnet runner
4) other forms of severe abuse
then on the 2nd instance of an abuse, then it gets 2 days, soon enough you
will single out the known and repeated abusers a
stoney` wrote:
>
> You can always set up a DCC chat with someone to exchange IP info.
> stoney`
ROFL
yeah like those who find their hidden host very important but have auto
accept DCC.
Isn't it an idea to create a new or change an existing X-command for level
400 and up to find out the host-IP adress. I think of something like:
Level <400:
/msg x verify #holland plankie
-X- [EMAIL PROTECTED] is logged in as plankie
Level >400:
/msg x verify #holland plankie
-X- [EMAIL PROTECTED
The reason why the x-mode was introduced was to prevent people fromg being
able to attack you in many ways, if someone is breaking the law/abusing
"hard" I am sure that undernet irc operators are more than happy to assist
you to inform a persons ISP etc, there is no sain reason why suddenly
channel
5 RIDER HAGGARD
CLOSE, JO, BORG
SOUTH AFRICA.
(HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL)
Ref: TRANSFER OF ($ 152,000.000.00 USD ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY TWO MILLION DOLLARS)
Dear Sir,
We want to transfer to overseas ($ 152,000.000.00 USD)One hundred and Fifty two
million United State Dollars) from a Prime B
Resending minus some LT/GT around e-mail addresses, because the previous one
seems to have been a false positive in the HTML detect rules.
- Forwarded message from Andrew Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 20:39:55 +1300
From: Andrew Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To
Quoting stoney` <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Well technically since cservice issues usernames that allow users to mode
> +x, they need to be notified when there's credible evidence of abuse.
> Unfortunately, the only way to confirm abuse is by having an IRCop check
> user@hosts of clones and then report
Wouldn't a time stamped log directly to cservice allow cservice to take
action against people abusing hidden host?
I note that X tracks my real ip/host, and has a valid e-mail address for me.
I also note that cservice tracks IP's well enough that single users
possessing multiple username's have t
When trying to join channels with ascii character 3 in the name, I now get a 'cahannel
does not exist' error. Since when? How come? Will this be fixed?
The RFC doesn't seem to say anything about any channel names being illegal.
The Storm Surfer wrote:
>
> When trying to join channels with ascii character 3 in the name, I now get a
>'cahannel does not exist' error. Since when? How come? Will this be fixed?
ircu on undernet checks for such characters (mirc control characters)
and disallows them, because they can be
> When trying to join channels with ascii character 3 in the name, I now get a
> 'cahannel does not exist' error. Since when? How come? Will this be fixed?
> The RFC doesn't seem to say anything about any channel names being illegal.
Since u2.10.11.03. Because these channel names have been a
Not a bad idea @ all.
- Necro
stoney` wrote:
Well technically since cservice issues usernames that allow users to
mode +x, they need to be notified when there's credible evidence of
abuse. Unfortunately, the only way to confirm abuse is by having an
IRCop check user@hosts of clones and then r
CALLING ALL OPERS!!! CALLING ALL OPERS!!!
In light of the recent events (on more networks then Undernet), I have
personally set up a channel called #S.A.L.T. It is a help channel for
people who have gone through DoS attacks, have been Nuked, Trojaned, or
hacked in any other way. #S.A.L.T, named
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 03 Jan 2003 4:54 pm, The Storm Surfer wrote:
> a 'cahannel does not exist' error. Since when? How come? Will this be
> fixed? The RFC doesn't seem to say anything about any channel names being
> illegal.
It's not going to be "fix
Tom,
your post just sucked bigtime.
even if they were g:lined they could still DoS the IP, so the g:line would
just be a tiny obstacle for them ...
- wensu
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 12:57 PM
Subjec
> CALLING ALL OPERS!!! CALLING ALL OPERS!!!
This is not appropriate to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] email list. Any
more off-topic mailings will result in your immediate unsubscription
from this list.
--
Kevin L. Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You're right, but they'll never be able to come on Undernet ever again!
Our channel is made, btw, to aid people in tracking down DoS attackers
and catching them dead in their tracks.
- Tom
Larry Kaeto wrote:
Tom,
your post just sucked bigtime.
even if they were g:lined they could still DoS t
Sorry. I thought since we're on the topic..I might as well talk about
#S.A.L.T.
- Necro
Kev wrote:
CALLING ALL OPERS!!! CALLING ALL OPERS!!!
This is not appropriate to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] email list. Any
more off-topic mailings will result in your immediate unsubscription
from this lis
I'm against channel ops being able to see "through" hidden hosts. I would
however like to see an IRCops related channel where users can report
abusive users who are hiding behind the +X mode. I think we all agree,
newbies and large channels are most often the target of these abuses, and
it's no
19 matches
Mail list logo
