Change nick for "disconkick" module #383

New Issue

2026-10-05T04:17:09+02:00

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:09 +02:00

disconkick kicks you using the ZNC nickname, which is a legal nickname. It should be changed to *status, *disconkick, or whatever.

`disconkick` kicks you using the `ZNC` nickname, which is a legal nickname. It should be changed to `*status`, `*disconkick`, or whatever.

adam closed this issue

2026-10-05 04:17:09 +02:00

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:10 +02:00

I think this issue can be closed now as the module is merged to core by https://github.com/znc/znc/commit/2f65dbbc6478c6e4e25718f5c1f4f6fc74c90e82.

I think this issue can be closed now as the module is merged to core by https://github.com/znc/znc/commit/2f65dbbc6478c6e4e25718f5c1f4f6fc74c90e82.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:11 +02:00

@Mikaela, please take the time to read what the issue says.

@Mikaela, please take the time to read what the issue says.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:11 +02:00

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood this as renaming the module.

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood this as renaming the module.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:12 +02:00

How about 0ZNC which is illegal nickname according to the RFCs by starting with number? Or 1.6,0znc (version number) having additional invalid characters by having the dots (I think)

How about `0ZNC` which is illegal nickname according to the RFCs by starting with number? Or 1.6,0znc (version number) having additional invalid characters by having the dots (I think)

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:13 +02:00

That wouldn’t be consistent. I think it’s better if it’s *status who kicks you.

That wouldn’t be consistent. I think it’s better if it’s `*status` who kicks you.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:13 +02:00

Why do you propose to use an illegal nickname according to RFC?
What's wrong with using *status or *disconkick?

2015-07-23 17:18 GMT+01:00 Mikaela Suomalainen notifications@github.com:

How about 0ZNC which is illegal nickname according to the RFCs by
starting with number? Or 1.6,0znc (version number) having additional
invalid characters by having the dots (I think)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
https://github.com/znc/znc/issues/649#issuecomment-124155520.

Why do you propose to use an illegal nickname according to RFC? What's wrong with using *status or *disconkick? 2015-07-23 17:18 GMT+01:00 Mikaela Suomalainen notifications@github.com: > How about 0ZNC which is illegal nickname according to the RFCs by > starting with number? Or 1.6,0znc (version number) having additional > invalid characters by having the dots (I think) > > — > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub > https://github.com/znc/znc/issues/649#issuecomment-124155520.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:14 +02:00

PR opened, I am not fully sure if that fixes this, but I don't see anything else that could control the kicker. I think *status is better than *disconkick as there is no separate disconkick anymore.

PR opened, I am not fully sure if that fixes this, but I don't see anything else that could control the kicker. I think *status is better than *disconkick as there is no separate disconkick anymore.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:14 +02:00

Could disconkick not send a PART instead, avoiding the entire "name" altogether, plus it won't show up as red in my client.

Could disconkick not send a PART instead, avoiding the entire "name" altogether, plus it won't show up as red in my client.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:15 +02:00

#1005 doesn't fix the issue as the prefix can be changed.

There have been two alternative suggestions:

using *** as the kicker by @kerio92
kickrejoin sending PART instead by @Zarthus

2015-07-23 20:33:46+0300 < Zarthus> to be entirely fair I think this would be easier if disconkick just sends parts instead                                                                                                                   │
2015-07-23 20:33:53+0300 < Zarthus> but I haven't tested the theory                                                                                                                                                                           │
2015-07-23 20:34:17+0300 < Mikaela> I think that would make the client attempt rejoining and get confused about not being able to join                                                                                                        │
2015-07-23 20:34:28+0300 < Zarthus> and kickrejoin is not a similar thing?                                                                                                                                                                    │
2015-07-23 20:34:36+0300 < Mikaela> or no, there is autorejoin on kick, you mmight be right                                                                                                                                                   │
2015-07-23 20:35:18+0300 < Zarthus> all in all, I would find it weird if an rfc-uncompliant nickname were to message me.                                                                                                                      │
2015-07-23 20:35:24+0300 < Zarthus> or kick                                                                                                                                                                                                   │
2015-07-23 20:35:34+0300 < Mikaela> it does all the time when you /znc                                                                                                                                                                        │

I think the latter could also be better as it has just hostmask of client and there is /remove which is forced part used on Charybdis based IRCds and other modern ones all the time so there shouldn't be any difference to kick except automatic rejoin on kick things not attempting to rejoin.

#1005 doesn't fix the issue as the prefix can be changed. --- There have been two alternative suggestions: - using `***` as the kicker by @kerio92 - kickrejoin sending `PART` instead by @Zarthus ``` 2015-07-23 20:33:46+0300 < Zarthus> to be entirely fair I think this would be easier if disconkick just sends parts instead │ 2015-07-23 20:33:53+0300 < Zarthus> but I haven't tested the theory │ 2015-07-23 20:34:17+0300 < Mikaela> I think that would make the client attempt rejoining and get confused about not being able to join │ 2015-07-23 20:34:28+0300 < Zarthus> and kickrejoin is not a similar thing? │ 2015-07-23 20:34:36+0300 < Mikaela> or no, there is autorejoin on kick, you mmight be right │ 2015-07-23 20:35:18+0300 < Zarthus> all in all, I would find it weird if an rfc-uncompliant nickname were to message me. │ 2015-07-23 20:35:24+0300 < Zarthus> or kick │ 2015-07-23 20:35:34+0300 < Mikaela> it does all the time when you /znc │ ``` I think the latter could also be better as it has just hostmask of client and there is `/remove` which is forced part used on Charybdis based IRCds and other modern ones all the time so there shouldn't be any difference to kick except automatic rejoin on kick things not attempting to rejoin.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:16 +02:00

@wodim could you rename this issue like "PART instead of KICK on disconnect"?

@wodim could you rename this issue like "PART instead of KICK on disconnect"?

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:16 +02:00

@Mikaela we haven’t reached such consensus yet. I oppose it.

@Mikaela we haven’t reached such consensus yet. I oppose it.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:17 +02:00

@wodim Can I ask what are your reasons for opposing it?

@wodim Can I ask what are your reasons for opposing it?

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:18 +02:00

@Mikaela I want to make it easy to programmatically detect (i.e. with a script) that I have been kicked by ZNC and not by a user. Hence the original request: something that cannot be spoofed in any way.

@Mikaela I want to make it easy to programmatically detect (i.e. with a script) that I have been kicked by ZNC and not by a user. Hence the original request: something that cannot be spoofed in any way.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:18 +02:00

Oh, I see, that makes sense. Maybe the part message could say something?

Oh, I see, that makes sense. Maybe the part message could say something?

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:19 +02:00

@Mikaela Whatever it says, it can be spoofed, not only by myself, but also by malicious server admins using commands such as /SVSPART or /SAPART.

@Mikaela Whatever it says, it can be spoofed, not only by myself, but also by malicious server admins using commands such as `/SVSPART` or `/SAPART`.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:20 +02:00

It seems that kick by invalid nick is the only way then.

It seems that kick by invalid nick is the only way then.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:20 +02:00

What are you writing that would be so vulnerable? :|

I cannot think of anything that would like to react on the ZNC disconnecting, especially since you are disconnected.

And while this is not a solution, if you're on a network where you don't trust the network of, perhaps you shouldn't be on it at all? They're probably doing other things, like spying on your conversations and banning people for no good reason.

What are you writing that would be so vulnerable? :| I cannot think of anything that would like to react on the ZNC disconnecting, especially since you *are* disconnected. And while this is not a solution, if you're on a network where you don't trust the network of, perhaps you shouldn't be on it at all? They're probably doing other things, like spying on your conversations and banning people for no good reason.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:21 +02:00

And while this is not a solution, if you're on a network where you don't trust the network of, perhaps you shouldn't be on it at all? They're probably doing other things, like spying on your conversations and banning people for no good reason.

Welcome to IRC.

> And while this is not a solution, if you're on a network where you don't trust the network of, perhaps you shouldn't be on it at all? They're probably doing other things, like spying on your conversations and banning people for no good reason. Welcome to IRC.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:17:22 +02:00

If at all possible, I would rather see it as an option to choose between the nickname you'd like to be kicked, or offer a part as alternative.

PS: There are SENDRAW modules that allow opers to send raw messages to users, you're never safe from being spoofed.

If at all possible, I would rather see it as an option to choose between the nickname you'd like to be kicked, or offer a part as alternative. PS: There are SENDRAW modules that allow opers to send raw messages to users, you're never safe from being spoofed.

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: adam/znc#383