I would like to connect my IRC server to the hackint network so all chats and channels that are hold on my IRC server are also mirrored in the hackint.net.
How can I set up that connection?
I am a bit unlucky in searching for it, cause I seem not to find the right keywords (peering???)
You don't automatically connect your ircd to a big irc network.
A big irc network has linking procedures and doesnt accept links from just anyone. You need to join the queue along with many others who want the same, you have to build trust and friendships with other server administrators and above all you must be altrustic and not want to just become an irc operator/admin.
Did you know that a lot of big irc servers (e.g. on efnet, freenode etc) are donated for free by businesses etc, and the donators don't even have any access beyond that of a user?
You may want to read on the linking policies of big networks to get an idea of the requirements, they expect servers with some level of performance, resilience to DDoS, good routing, and not a simple VPS:
https://www.dal.net/?page=Application%20Guidelines
http://ircnet.barfooze.de/articles/linking/
http://www.efnet.info/?module=docs&doc=16&type=html
You can use a bit of another Concept:
set up a Matrix synapse node and an IRC-Bridge
All chats and users will be stored locally in your homeserver and whenever possible mirrored in the IRC-Chat and back.
This is what I ended up with, so I'll set this as accepted answer, although the other hints are good to know and also valid.
IRCD-Hybrid -- High Performance Internet Relay Chat:
apt-get install ircd-hybrid
Then you have to adapt the configuration file to Connect Multiple IRC Servers
In the IRC world it's called "linking a server"
Related
I want to setup a personal videoconferencing service for my family, friends and myself. The main problem I have with current options is that they are either closed-source and centralized (GG hangouts, skype) or open-source but not working in corporate environment or in hotels (due to strict firewalling rules and the "Skype is going through, if you want VOIP use that" kind of netadmin reaction).
I have two solutions then. Either setup a STUN/TURN relay server and use XMPP and SIP as I used to, but that would require my friends to setup that too. Or setup a whole VOIP server. 2 solutions come to mind: SIP and XMPP. Though to my knowledge, each of them ultimately uses the (S)RTP/RTCP protocol.
And that's the problem. Out of the specific signaling part used by the two of them, I really can't figure out the difference between them, their typical use case.
I think you're right in that as far as setting up a video conferencing system XMPP and SIP are equivalent. They both are signalling only protocols and the media sessions they set up typically use RTP (although they can both be used to set up any kind of session you want but RTP is the norm).
The biggest problem is also going to be the one you mention about getting video streams out of a corporate firewall. Skype overcomes this obstacle by sending it's media over an SSL connection and is thus able to get through firewalls. Theoretically you could do the same with RTP and in the past I once used openvpn connections with a SIP client to test some audio calls. My experience wasn't great as the audio was very choppy, assumedly as a result of all the extra packaging that is required to get the high volume of small audio packets from one end to the other. That was nearly a decade ago though so perhaps with the better CPU and bandwidth resources available now it would work better.
Personally I think I'd stick with Skype as it's going to be a big hassle to set up your own system. If you were to go ahead with your own the first option I would try would be Asterisk combined with openvpn so that if the clients were behind a firewall or had NAT issues they could connect over it.
How to implement a bot with ejabberd?
The idea is that on my (Debian 7.0 Wheezy) VPS, I'm running ejabberd and there I have a special bot Jabber user with limited set of commands that he can run. Let's call him butler#myvps.foo.
On another box (say, my android phone), I have a Jabber client connected to my account at possibly a third party server. Let's call it me#somewhere.bar.
Now I want ejabberd to:
allow only one specific Jabber ID, me#somewhere.bar to ever communicate with this
butler#myvps.foo.
have everything typed into chat with butler#myvps.foo passed to shell and executed
as a command, possibly in a chrooted or another protected environment (e.g. using
a specific limited user). (And the STDOUT + STDERR returned as a reply, of course.)
I understand there can be security risks, but for now I just want to know if this the way to go.
You can simply write a bot in any language and have it connect to the XMPP server as a client. A list of XMPP client libraries can be found here.
The bot can check the JID in the 'from' attribute of messages it receives to verify identity. It is not generally possible to forge a JID in XMPP, as servers authenticate their clients and also each other. In reality however it is only as secure as the authentication methods used (and the server containing no bugs).
To execute commands and read the results, a PTY is a good easy solution. There are PTY libraries available in many languages, including Python, Ruby and Lua.
You are right that security is an issue, as with any system. Years of effort have gone into securing ssh, and issues still arise occasionally.
It is worth noting that Google's XMPP server does not support encryption for server-to-server connections, so someone on a network between your XMPP server and Google's would be able to see your messages, and potentially modify and/or forge them completely.
And finally, even if they did support encryption for the server-to-server link... Google themselves technically have the ability to send messages as you, and your phone would also be a potential weak point.
Isolating the target process will remove a lot of security concerns. If the server runs on Linux, LXC containers might be a good solution for you.
Hopefully this covers all aspects of your question!
I'm making an IRC bot for a game to connect the in-game chat to an arbitrary IRC network/channel.
Some users complain that the bot takes too much time to load, and it's because of the bot having to get the MOTD.
Is there a way to ignore the MOTD?
The bot is using the LuaIRC library for IRC protocol handling.
The protocol described in RFC 1459 (section 8.5) defines that the MOTD will be sent to every client that is connecting to an IRC server.
This is part of the connection procedure and if you want to ignore it, you have to manage that on your client. I guess this is not about reading it or ignoring it, but rather not being annoyed by the time spent to make the bot ignore these messages.
If you happen to be the administrators of one of the network you are connecting to, you might want to connect your bot as an IRC operator. Some classes use to be defined for special users or servers in order to make them able to read data faster.
But for the other networks, you will have to find a way to manage this MOTD better, because you will receive it anyway.
We currently have POP3 mail accounts where I am and try as I might to convince my manager that we should be using hosted IMAP or Exchange he won't budge because of the cost. The staff are mostly out of office so there is no domain server here, however, we do have a dedicated server and I wondered whether I could use this to collect the mail and distribute it from there in some way.
Effectively what I'm trying to do is ensure mail is stored somewhere other than the end users machine because backups are user dependant at the moment. With hosted Exchange or Exchange on this server would be simple but my manager won't shell out for it. I have seen free mail servers called MailEnable and Axigen but unsure if they will do the job. Sorry if this seems like an easy or stupid question but never needed to do this before.
I am assuming due to the reference to Exchange that you are on Windows.
If you have an old box lying around that works, you could install linux on it and then choose from a number of different imap servers. Dovecot and Courier are both good choices and I have worked with them before.
You could use fetchmail to then pick up the mailboxes and then deliver to the imap boxes or get them deliver directly.
Setting up such a linux server for email was one of the first things I ever did on Linux. While initially daunting, once you get the hang of it, it is pretty straightforward and there are plenty of resources out there to help.
Ubuntu is probably the easiest to get used to. CentOs is also a reasonable choice.
You shouldn't be running your own server if you aren't willing to administer your own server, and they are not easy to configure if you don't know what you are doing (e.g., you mess up and you are exploited for spamming).
Look into a service like mailgun. In my application we are using them for forwarding to REST endpoints as well as onto another SMTP server.
Competitors that wound up not meeting my needs but may meet yours include Dyn, email yak, Sendgrid, etc. etc.
Why not just setup the mail clients to store their mail files on a standard network drive or share? I follow that this situation is pretty silly in your view - 100% because of the ridiculous constraints that you are being asked to work within: I would similarly find the solution I am suggesting ridiculous generally; but under the circumstances, it seems like a simple answer to your problem - replacing distributed mail storage and backup with centralized storage and backup.
Don't POP3 email clients have the option keep a copy on the server? Mine certainly does. See second tick box on the pic.
You can then periodically take a back up of all the emails from the server to stop it getting clogged up.
I am aware of how many times this has been asked based on searching StackOverflow, but I am still hoping someone could tell me whether I am wrong...
I am creating a peer-to-peer chat app for the iPhone. My initial idea was to avoid using a server, so Bonjour came to mind. I was happy coding for quite a while and implemented a lot of fancy features, but two days ago I started testing with two clients from different subnets and found that the clients couldn't connect to each other! I suddenly realized that Bonjour is meant for local networks and that a DNS server is necessary for wide area service broadcasting. Do I really need a server for Internet peer-to-peer chat? Are there any other options that do not involve using a server on the iOS platform?
I am wondering how you can do a chat app without using a server. There are many cheap solutions out there, Amazon has its own service, Google does as well. You can try first without even having to pay a cent.
I found the following from apple developer guide. This should answer your question -
Does Bonjour work between multiple subnets?
Yes. The first release of DNS Service Discovery (DNS-SD) for Mac OS X concentrated on Multicast DNS (mDNS) for single-link networks because this was the environment worst served by IP software. Starting in Mac OS X 10.4, Bonjour now uses Dynamic DNS Update (RFC 2316) and unicast DNS queries to enable wide-area service discovery.
To answer the question, the only way is for you to carry a list of all possible participants, and their current IP address, and for each possible participant to report to all others each time their IP Address changes. So, if you have 100 possible participants, then you must tell 99 others when your IP Address changes, and those 99 must tell you when their IP Address changes.
Bonjour may work on a LAN, a WAN or even a WAN, but it will never work on the internet.
The role of the server is so that each end point only need to tell one end point (the server) when it changes. My advice is get a cheap internet host, with a basic PHP / MySQL capabilities, and write yourself a very simple script to post and get user identities.