!admins not allowed control

[mopes]

hi, i'm having some problems with being authorized to use certain !triggers with the bot. i have my config setup like:

channel = #lobby ctrlchan = #botchannel extrachans = #that, #other ctrlpass = password nickpass = password ctrlkey = ⟵ what is this? admins = mynick, anothernick

!admins mynick (U), anothernick (U)

!msg #lobby http://goo.gl/vfsLvN You are not a admin.

1. What am I doing wrong here?
2. What does ctrlkey do?
3. What does ctrlchan do?
4. How do I get (V)erfied as an admin by the bot?

Thanks

[sapphire-arches]

1. Nothing, as far as I can tell
2. For channels with +k, the bot needs to know the key to join the channel
3. ctrlchan is a special channel that the bot watches for specially formated messages which are currently not documented anywhere (we should probably do that). The important ones are accept [issue|quote] and reject [issue|quote] The are used to prevent users from adding quotes and issues that you as an admin to approve/reject quotes and issues.
4. We use NickServ to verify that the nick is both registered and logged in: We check the return value of /msg NickServ ACC $NICK If you don't have a logged-in NickServ account then you need to make one. If your network doesn't support NickServ, please let us know and we can add the option to disable it.

[pefoley2]

The ctrlchan messages are documented, just run help in the ctrlchan. The ctrlchan should have a secret key, because otherwise anybody in the channel can send raw irc commands as the bot.

[mopes]

Thanks for the response.

when I type /msg nickserv acc mynick it comes back invalid command, what is the 'acc' part?

[sapphire-arches]

ACC provides a stable, parseable interface for querying a nick's NickServ status. What IRC network are you trying to run the bot on?

[mopes]

i'm on rizon, so i don't think they have that feature. it looks like an option to disable the nickserv verify, or some other means would be my only way to admin the bot.

[sapphire-arches]

Hmm, maybe

 auth_type = none|nickserv|whois

@pefoley2 input? @TechFilmer suggested using whois which outputs [bob_twinkles] is logged in as bob_twinkles and insists it's stable/specified by IRC RFC but I don't trust it

[sapphire-arches]

Yeah, RFC 1459 doesn't specify the format to be returned by /whois

We could go full-crazy and write whois parsers for a bunch of different networks I guess...

[sckasturi]

I'm investigating the exact format used by multiple networks. Be back in a bit with findings.

-----

• Tech http://techfilmer.com/Filmer http://youtube.com/techfilmer *

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:12 PM, bobtwinkles notifications@github.comwrote:

Yeah, RFC 1459 doesn't specify the format to be returned by /whois

We could go full-crazy and write whois parsers for a bunch of different networks I guess...

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/tjcsl/cslbot/issues/669#issuecomment-32333431 .

[sapphire-arches]

hostmask is another valid option.

[mopes]

indeed, checking against the hostmask would likely work; would it work against a customvhost though?

[sapphire-arches]

We were discussing using vhosts and support for them is definitely possible. The current plan is to use the admins= field as a list of regular expressions describing hostmasks of allowed admins if auth_type = hostmask. If we can get that working adding support for vhost regular expressions should be trivial.

[sckasturi]

After careful testing vhost, cloaks, and hostmasks as a result of +x and IPs works with the current implementation plan. We should be fixing this soon.

[mopes]

Thanks guys, looking forward to it. :)

[pefoley2]

I'd recommend having the default be NickServ auth, and adding a option to just match nick/hostmasks w/ regex.

[an-empty-string]

One way to do this would be another config variable:

admin_hosts = wikipedia/Fox-Wilson, this.is.a.great.example.of.a.vhost.com, sdamashek.me

then something like this in the is_admin function:

if get_host_for(nick=nick) in admin_hosts:
    return True

before the NickServ check.

[pefoley2]

ok, but if nickserv doesn't work, we don't want it silently failing every time a admin speaks.

[an-empty-string]

Agreed. do_nickserv = 0? Or just check that admin_hosts is empty before asking NickServ about things?

Also, we should really get some better permissions than just "is an admin" and "is not an admin." I can work on this.

[pefoley2]

I'd go with something like @bobtwinkles's auth_type=nick|nickserv|hostmask Create another issue to track better permissions.

[sckasturi]

Another option used by Supybot is to have user accounts that people sign into for admin stuff if NickServ is not available. i.e. nickname would privmsg identify uname pword to bot. Then their host mask is stored as being an admin till the bot dies.

-----

• Tech http://techfilmer.com/Filmer http://youtube.com/techfilmer *

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 5:53 PM, pefoley2 notifications@github.com wrote:

I'd go with something like @bobtwinkles https://github.com/bobtwinkles's auth_type=nick|nickserv|hostmask Create another issue to track better permissions.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/tjcsl/cslbot/issues/669#issuecomment-32424501 .

[pefoley2]

Might work, we could store the full hostmask in sql, and only update it when the nick re-auths (DHCP change, or something).

[sckasturi]

Yeah, I think that is best. User accounts should work really well.

Additionally for more accounts, we can have chan op, bot admin, and owner. That about all I can see as being needed, and afaik that's all that Supybot has.

-----

• Tech http://techfilmer.com/Filmer http://youtube.com/techfilmer *

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:51 PM, pefoley2 notifications@github.com wrote:

Might work, we could store the full hostmask in sql, and only update it when the nick re-auths (DHCP change, or something).

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/tjcsl/cslbot/issues/669#issuecomment-32428801 .

[pefoley2]

That has to do with @fwilson42's prospective permissions work, so should really go in that bug when it gets created.

[mopes]

is this supybot the de facto standard or something?

[pefoley2]

No, just another bot that has some useful features