Page 1 of 2
Can I hide my idle time ?
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 8:18 am
by haku
Can I hide my idle time ?
what flag it is ?
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 3:53 pm
by Dukat
No, you can't, sorry
Although there's this suspicious passage in m_whois.c:
Code: Select all
/*
* Fix /whois to not show idle times of
* global opers to anyone except another
* global oper or services.
* -CodeM/Barubary
*/
I'm not sure what the meaning of this is... Maybe someone should post a feature/bug request at bugs.unrealircd.com?
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 4:36 pm
by codemastr
I never quite understood why you would want to hide the idle time.
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2004 4:45 pm
by Syzop
It's an old comment that no longer applies.
The "feature" was added @ Dec 5 2000 [.102] and was later removed on May 27 2001 [.159] with the comment 'Fixed /whois problem, maybe introduced some others?' [stskeeps].
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 1:30 am
by jewles
ummmm plus that wouldn't be an ircd thing it would be more of a client side problem... that that it's possible anywho! but yeah codemastr is right, what the hell would you care enought....
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 1:39 am
by w00t
Could be either, either the server could just not send the idle time (sounds like he wants to hide HIS to OTHERS) or could get the client not to display it in the whois response.
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 2:48 am
by codemastr
Yeah, I assume he doesn't want it to be sent out. But why? It's incredibly useful. If I go to /msg someone, and I can see this person is /away and idle for 6 hours, I know not to expect a response. However, if I see they are 30 seconds idle, most likely I will get one. If you really don't want people to know your idle time, every N minutes have your client send a command to reset it.
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 3:19 am
by w00t
Most scripts seem to do that, don't know about any clients that do however.
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 3:30 pm
by aquanight
[useless rant]Or someone can make PONG reset idle time
[/useless rant]
But seriously:
Not that hard. Though you'll probably want to actually do the /ctcp in an alias and call that, so that $me is evalutated everytime the timer ticks (so as to keep up with /nick changes).
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:12 pm
by w00t
aquanight wrote:[useless rant]Or someone can make PONG reset idle time
[/useless rant]
You'd be surprised how many early ircds do that...
Ive seen around 3 undergoing dev who all did that
Most scripts I know just send a junk PRIVMSG.
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2004 1:23 am
by aquanight
w00t wrote:You'd be surprised how many early ircds do that...
Ive seen around 3 undergoing dev who all did that
OMG... PING/PONG is supposed to be used
during inactivity... unless they're using the idle time as a ping counter
/
.
w00t wrote:Most scripts I know just send a junk PRIVMSG.
Like the /timer thing I mentioned?
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2004 1:32 am
by w00t
The PING\PONG thing is usually overlooked, they just whack a thing in saying "if we recieve something from client, then reset their idle time".
As for your timer thing, unless I am wrong, that is sending a PING to yourself, not a junk PRIVMSG
Both accomplish the same thing, just saying.
Ok, lets all go before this gets really off topic.
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2004 1:39 am
by aquanight
w00t wrote:Ok, lets all go before this gets really off topic.
... and before I have to wip out more offsite smilies...
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:47 pm
by Nugget
I presume the goal is to obscure the potential situation where all the IRCops on a network are idle and therefore unable to respond to abuse. Channels that don't have complete Op coverage are often subject to this sort of abuse where the lamers wait until all the channel ops go to sleep before flooding the channel. It's reasonable to assume that the same sort of abuse is possible at the network/ircop level.
That said, I'm not in favor of the feature. It'll just encourage people to ask for the ability to hide channel op idle times for the same reason. In my opinion the benefit of public idle times far outweighs the potential for abuse.
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 11:30 pm
by w00t
Once again, well said nugget.