Using partyline commands in the channel window

[janipewter]

Is there anyway to do this? For example if it knows your host as the owner or something, you can do commands like .+ban from the channel window rather than on the partline in dcc/telnet?

[demond]

there is, but that would be extremely lame

someone could spoof your host and there goes poof your bot (and shell account)

[Ian-Highlander]

Or you could try my script "The_Quickening" which has 110 public commands in it and does cover almost all of the standard DCC commands or any of the other public command scripts in the archive.

It has an authentication system built in as well so recognises you by hostmask and requires a password for use. The authentication system automatically removes your authentication when you leave the rooms the bot is on, although I would recommend you only stay auth'd while using the script and once finished manually deauth each time. Otherwise you do leave yourself open to spoofing.

Some people like the convenience of public commands demond, just because you think its lame doesnt make it so. Whilst when I'm at home I use DCC all the time, while at work, I cant get a DCC connection so the public commands come in damn useful.

[janipewter]

Ian - thanks a lot, that's exactly what I was after, and it works a charm

Is there a way to get rid of the advert though? Every 10 minutes it PM's me with a load of stuff, and it gets annoying

[Ian-Highlander]

Advert? There's no advert in the script. PM's you? it doesnt PM anyone for anything.

Ahh I know what you mean, there's an anti idle script which sends a message to itself built into it just to stop the bot being kicked for idling on servers that dont like it. If you're on the partyline you will see that every time it triggers.

If you dont want that to run, commenting out the below code and rehashing should stop it.

Code: Select all

#Anti Idle
set idle-timer 10
set idle-msg "$x Eggdrop [lindex $version 0] With : \002'The Quickening'\002 $scriptvers ©Ian-Highlander 2001"

set bowt-nick "$botnick"
set bowt-nick [string tolower ${nick}]
if {![info exists {antikill}]} {
 global bowt-nick idle-msg idle-timer
 set antikill 1
 timer ${idle-timer} antikill
}

proc antikill {} {
 global bowt-nick idle-msg idle-timer
 putserv "PRIVMSG ${bowt-nick} :${idle-msg}"
 timer ${idle-timer} antikill
}

[demond]

Some people like the convenience of public commands demond, just because you think its lame doesnt make it so. Whilst when I'm at home I use DCC all the time, while at work, I cant get a DCC connection so the public commands come in damn useful.

well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion

mine is that any public control of the bot - that is, control mechanism that uses public medium like irc channel - is inherently insecure and is best avoided (and I've argued about that many times)

if you really can't DCC (I've also argued that anyone could DCC if they try hard enough, see my sticky topics), you should consider using privmsg/notice instead of channel messages

on a side note, even 110 commands can't really substitute full party-line control; in order to implement that, you need to simulate DCC chat, as does rconsole

[Ian-Highlander]

well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion

mine is that any public control of the bot - that is, control mechanism that uses public medium like irc channel - is inherently insecure and is best avoided (and I've argued about that many times)

if you really can't DCC (I've also argued that anyone could DCC if they try hard enough, see my sticky topics), you should consider using privmsg/notice instead of channel messages

on a side note, even 110 commands can't really substitute full party-line control; in order to implement that, you need to simulate DCC chat, as does rconsole

Inherently insecure? Perhaps, slightly, in that while you are auth'd if your host is spoofed then someone could use the commands but of course as a responsible bot owner you wouldnt leave that door open and would "deauth" as soon as you had issued the commands you needed to. You would also of course have a high standard of password. I even provided scripts for mIRC and Pirch with the script to add menus to do this quickly. As well as that if someone was to do that you would generally see them doing it and be able to prevent it there and then unless they spoofed you and waited until you left the room thus fooling the bot into thinking you where still there. However barring that slight chance that someone would spoof your host while you are using it, it is no less secure than anything else with Eggdrop which as we all know is not a particularly secure way of doing anything and shouldnt be relied on for anything that is considered critical which, lets be honest here, a chat room certainly is not.

Personally, I cant DCC to my bots from outside my network because they run on my own network and I deliberately block all and any access to anything that's un-necessary externally. My bots have internal IP numbers on a virtual IP Range set as secondary IP numbers on an internal NIC because the chat server they run on is on the same box). I also work for an ISP and sit behind double NAT'd firewalls from the office which blocks just about everything, sure as a network engineer and IT Support specialist I know ways round that but I value my job and dont want to lose it for abusing my knowledge.

I didnt at ANY time say it "substituted full party-line control". I specifically said it covers most of the commonly used commands and if I ever get round to developing it further it will do more but I dont have a major interest in that script anymore and spend my spare time working on Trivia 2000 these days.

On one of your other points I did write a version of The_Quickening a long time ago that used primarily private message instead of public commands but people hated it and I had so many complaints asking me to switch it back that I stopped developing it.

Anyway, as you say, everyone is entitled to their opinions, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.