at selected places (there needs to be explicit code in place to handle this).
At the moment it is supported at two places only:
* For spamfilters (was already possible via crules via ::rule with
a destination('xyz') but now non-crule destination "#xyz"; works as well, eg:
spamfilter {
...
except {
destination "#main";
}
}
Note that if you want to exempt a destination in all spamfilters,
we already have set::spamfilter::except for that!
* In restrict commands for like channel-message and such:
set {
restrict-commands {
channel-message {
except {
connect-time 600;
destination "#test";
}
}
}
}
Allow passing a crule_context via user_allowed_by_security_group_context()
and make user_allowed_by_security_group() call that.
Actually document spamfilter::except online in the docs (yeah you
won't see it in this commit, just mentioning...)
And yeah, by now i wonder if we should really call it crule_context
since it is more like a security group matching context, but.. whatever.
The reason for the warning is that in some future UnrealIRCd version I want the
rpc-user::rpc-class to become a required item.
This commit also adds rpc-class.default.conf which is by default
included from rpc.modules.default.conf.
This also completes the TODO list from b9de933378
(the rpc.add_timer was never a loophole and i kept rpc.info as-is)
This wasn't caught by Address Sanitizer because we simply never removed
it from the linked list, and thus it was a reachable pointer.
Found this bug when adding the rpc-class { } stuff.
This so you can restrict the JSON Methods that can be called, eg:
rpc-class limited {
privileges {
server { list; get; }
channel { list; get; }
user { list; get; }
}
}
rpc-user xyz {
match { ip 127.0.0.1; }
password "test";
rpc-class limited;
}
NOTE: This is work in progress
1) Things are NOT yet fully contained, as i need to lock down
rpc.add_timer still :)
2) Some more work, eg rpc.info would be nice to show some
information about the restriction (??)
3) Need to fix a memory leak
4) Possibly more
The build tests were failing for tkldb save & restore. Cause was this:
if (tkl->ptr.serverban->match)
^ this is wrong.. because it doesn't check if tkl is a server ban
So it could be tkl->ptr.spamfilter->whatever_is_at_that_memory_offset
which is non-NULL.
Could have updated the code to an if (IsServerBan... && tkl->..etc..)
but decided to ditch this needless code altogether.
As this wasn't needed at all since it already skips config-based.
And all mask items bans are config-based.
One of those rare cases where trying to be extra careful actually
causes a fuckup.
Ignore these for entire src/dns.c.
Quoting https://github.com/c-ares/c-ares/pull/732#issuecomment-2028454381:
"Those deprecated functions will remain available until there is an ABI
break, which honestly will likely never happen. It's more to encourage
integrators to move to the more modern functions."
Also, keep in mind that several of these 'deprecations' happened in early 2024
while the new function was introduced in March 2020, like for ares_getaddrinfo().
That isn't all that long ago, only 4 years. So we would need compatibility code
for both the old and new function for a while.
So: we can look into that in some major new UnrealIRCd version, nothing urgent,
and perhaps by then it is long enough that we don't need the fallback to older
functions.
Hmm... we should probably use json_expand_tkl() differently for match items
instead of returning "<match-item>" literally. Consider this a TODO item :D
This only happens for config-based bans that can't be removed anyway, so..
This so you can get the same spamreport data to your own custom system.
It works similar to set::central-blocklist::url but then on a
spamreport { } basis which is better, since then you can still
submit to UnrealIRCd central spamreport too.
So you can have two blocks:
spamreport unrealircd { type central-spamreport; }
spamreport custom { type central-spamreport; url 'https://www.example.org/xyz'; }
And then a /SPAMREPORT or 'report;' action will report it to BOTH.
Requested by Chris
* restrict-commands: add option 'channel-create' for managing who may create new channels.
This has been a commonly requested feature with different requested options, I think it makes sense to do it properly from here
Reported by Valware. E.g. if HOOKTYPE_CAN_JOIN rejects the join
when it is a new channel.
( And yeah... +P channels are not destroyed... handled in
sub1_from_channel() -> HOOKTYPE_CHANNEL_DESTROY already. )
There was an incorrect OperOverride message if you were had +h, +a or +q
and was kicking someone that you should normally be able to (without override).
This requires quite a bit of further testing, though, it's so easy to get
this wrong. The FIXME still stands to fix this for good some day.
Reported by Valware in https://bugs.unrealircd.org/view.php?id=6423
Reported by hnj in https://bugs.unrealircd.org/view.php?id=6418
Appears to have been introduced as part of the 6.x refactor of secret/private channel modes in 8066c13876
Also adjust message for ERR_OPERSPVERIFY to include channel name.
This is to correspond closer to other similar numerics around this area, as well as agreeing with the definition within modern.
crule is used outside security groups / spamfilter, like in
deny link { }.
Also update the match_realname() since via the extban code it would
use match_esc() which is rather confusing if you have double (or
perhaps even triple) escaping when using this in the conf.
match_user_extended_server_ban except that it works by name/value.
This can then be used by crules or in other mods, like:
user_matches_extended_server_ban(client, "country", "NL");
If the performance impact isn't too bad (of the extra work) then
this prevents duplicate code in the handler for things like
that: account, country, certfp, and whatever we add in the future..
Otherwise in pre-connect-stage is_identified(), is_webirc()
and is_websocket() will always return false due to the
IsUser() check.
One should always be careful with accessing things in pre-
connect-stage, but in this case the IsLoggedIn() and
moddata_client_get() are safe to use. The former checks
client->user and the latter does not access anything within
client->user at all.
Bram Matthys