single char nicks.

[xmage]

Just looking for other opinions about this.

Curious as to why servers dont just jupe all single character nicknames? X and W were juped to avoid "password collecting." I know for a fact that many other of the single char nicks get /msg'd passwords just as often. So why not put all single char nicks on services as well? If you ask me, single character nicks just bring more uneeded packets.

ps. feel free to edit this post for any grammar/spelling errors (work sucks when you're stuck working 7 days straight for weeks)

[clunked]

If anyone wants to, they can probably find some nick to fool at least a few people. It would end up a cat and mouse game if every one of these was attempted to be juped.

[sealie]

You are making a good point, even though there are alot more significant
nicknames to jupe if you want to prevent password exposure. I do agree
that alphabet nicks do bring alot of trouble, and some servers often have
to bite the dust just to house them.

lub sealie

[Pills]

Umich has them juped. At least a few other servers do, too.

[lucy]

if i cant have l nobody should have it

and my bots get alot of people's passwords, but they get called dumbass for doing it, so hopefully the person msging them will be smart enough to change it when they realize they screwed up.

but some dont get it, its pretty funny to watch people keep talking to the bots, when all the bots say back to them is dumbass everytime.

[munky]

nicknames like "i" "me" and "you" get some interesting private msgs (though few passwords)

"test" gets some stuff from people testing scripts or un-configured scripts

there will always be some nickname or other that will get information that was not intended for that client. imho, i believe it is up to users to make sure they are communicating with the person/bot they think they are, and jupes should be used for preventing users from impersonating services and whatnot (ie - users can't use ChanServ).

[Jon]

if an user is dumb enough to /msg nick op pass (or whatever) without checking to see if that nick was even in the channel OR in the ops list, too bad.

like "read the fucking manual" , "look at the fucking op list".

[Gozem]

No! I want my alias for killing all one-char nicks to work :-)

[lucy]

No! I want my alias for killing all one-char nicks to work

DO IT

[Pills]

if an user is dumb enough to /msg nick op pass (or whatever) without checking to see if that nick was even in the channel OR in the ops list, too bad.

like "read the fucking manual" , "look at the fucking op list".

People have automated scripts to log into various networks. Back before Nickserv was juped on individual servers, I held it for a bit when services was split or down. The floods of passwords are ridiculous.

[-wassup-]

Umich has them juped. At least a few other servers do, too.

i was reading in example.conf.trillian that if a server jupes a nick it has to be juped on all servers, does that still apply or is it outdated info?

[munky]

depends on the network

it does not apply on efnet

[Hwy]

i was reading in example.conf.trillian that if a server jupes a nick it has to be juped on all servers, does that still apply or is it outdated info?

Nick jupes do not have to be applied to each server, it would simply apply only to users on that one server. If an admin left out "NickServ", and services.xo was split, a user on that server could take it without any issue. None of the other servers, even if they had that nick juped, could do anything about the remote user.

To be completely effective against global network "threats" (ie services and oper impersonation), the nicks should be juped on all servers.

Most of the most dangerous nicks are held by services.xo, and as long as it remains up, the nicks it holds will remain as fake users on the network. It's when they true jupes go down that the nickname reservations take effect.

[Pat]

We have them juped on foxlink too.

Pat