Re: Anti-collide patch

[Michal *pht* Svoboda <svobodam@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Joern Westermann wrote:

> Kaspar Landsberg wrote:
> > 
> > the problem with the FNC (forced nick change) solution is that it can easily
> > result in a loop. Suppose a nick collision happens and Guenthi changes to
> > Guent6387. But now, there´s some guy sitting on one of your channels and
> > sees that you get a new nick. All he needs now is a lagged server or a
> > server which is currently reconnecting and he can hook up "on the other
> > side" a client with the same nick, resulting in a nick collision, which
> > makes the whole thing restart from 0 ad infinitum.
> 
> I know. This way a channel cannot be taken over, but it'll be a totally
> useless channel. But I could also think about a script to defend against
> this approach: It notices a collide and after the channel rejoin it
> kicks out all non-channel ops and sets the channel +i. So it's
> impossible for the attacker to find out the new nick after the next
> collide.
> Ok, I also hate those warscripts. :(
this wouldnt be any use because the attacker sits on lagged server, which
doesnt get the kick. 
pht