Undo the password ignore fix

[bigbadjames]

repost.
* Allow b_channel_join_ignore_password for server groups and global client
permissions only, others make no sense.

YES IT DID! Now you have gone and screwed up my permissions. My clients that are in a Normal group can not normally access password protected channels. We have various password protected channels that some of the people in our Normal group have been given access to via this permission, not everyone has access to necessarily the same set of rooms.
"Just give them the password" you say. yeah, not a good idea, that just invites trouble of them giving it to someone else "for one time only, promise not to do it again" situations. It is more secure to allow the individuals access via the ignore password then to give out the password.

Please change this BACK to the way it was!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alcazar
Or use client permissions and give those users that permission.

That's what they took away was the client permission. I could give people access to a single channel using the client permission version of ignore password. This is now gone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroTKA
If they give away the password, then change the password and don't give it to them.

Id rather just leave a long, strong password on the channel and give people permission. MUCH MUCH MORE SECURE! Including from the TS hackers. I can't wait for that to start. We'll see how good this thing is then!

Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Ludwig
what ? you can set that permission still on servergroups AND global client.
all other just makes no sense

Global client or server group is fine for global access. However, if you have a person that you want to allow access to ONE particular passworded channel, WITHOUT giving out a password, you can no longer do that. We were able to set IGNORE PASSWORD on that client's permissions for INDIVIDUAL channels, and can NOT do that now. Like i said, that is a MORE SECURE way of doing it than giving out passwords. Plus you don't have to worry about changing the password should you throw the person out, or they leave or whatever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alcazar
If you dont like TS, feel free to use other voicechat-programms.
Youre not obliged to use it.
And ranting will not change anything.

Just saying they should never took out a feature that was already in use. I especially had it in use quite a bit and it really messed up my permissions for everyone. There was a point to the feature obviously, as it was being used, so why get rid of something that worked? Like I said, FAIL TEAMSPEAK, wasting time removing something that worked just fine, while things that are broken go untouched still. If that's ranting then so is the entire suggestion forum, isn't that just people ranting about something they want added to teamspeak? If they don't like it they can use another one too then right? I'm not asking for a NEW feature, just one that we already had given back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by azzy101
you cannot please everyone

yet no one complained about having the permission, but i am complaining about losing it as it was heavily in use. so why was it removed again? oh wait, cuz no one complained about it. might as well take half the features out then, you know all the other ones no one has complained about having because they like them and use them already.

freaking trolls. if your not part of the solution stay out of the conversation

Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickW
I would say: Make that group a server group! Everything else really doesn't make sense, because all other rights are restricted to one channel, whereas the right gave access to all password protected channels.

no it wasnt, you could set it on a channel by channel basis for an individual.

So anyways, like I was saying, it made PERFECT sense to allow an individual access to a single channel using the permission without giving them the password. I don't even know what the passwords are as I use a strong password generator and just copy/paste it into the channel, so why would I want to give that out? It just compromises security. Put back what wasn't broken in the first place.

[Peter]

Here is how you can allow a certain group of individuals access to a channel:

Put the needed_join_power to join the channel X to some high value (999) in the channel permissions.
Create a channel group that should allow you to join a channel. Put all users that should be able to enter channel "X" into this group, in channel X. Make sure this channel group has a join_power that is high enough to join the channel (>= 999).

As result only clients that are in this channel group can join, you have the same access control like you did with random password + ignore passwords, except that there is no "dummy password" that you need to generate.

[bigbadjames]

That creates an awful lot of channel groups. The original method was still much simpler.

[Master_D]

Why should is be simple, using a right for this. If you use user-based-rights, if local or global doesn'm mind, but you have to remember, who has this rights.
With using a group, you can see, who is member of this group. You do not need to remember, who has the rights.

[Gantor]

Why should is be simple, using a right for this. If you use user-based-rights, if local or global doesn'm mind, but you have to remember, who has this rights.
With using a group, you can see, who is member of this group. You do not need to remember, who has the rights.

And of course you can use a temporary group, than you don't have to remember who has rights to join the channel.

[Madmatthi]

then i just hope for you that u dont have many, permanent growing groups... otherwise you have a lot to do :)
second point is that you cant "invite" a guest to your channel. if you cant switch him you have to meet him "outside"

[Peter]

You don't have a lot of groups, you have exactly one "may join protected channels" group. Say I want to have two clans coexist on my server, and they should each have their private "Clan A Private Channel" and "Clan B Private Channel Rooms". You modify the needed_join_power on each of those private channels (put it to 150), then you grant clan members of Clan A the "may join protected channels" channel group in the channel "Clan A Private Channel". Then you grant members of Clan B the "may join protected channels" channel group in channel "Clan B Private Channel". Obviously the "may join protected channels" group gives you a join power of 150+, so the result is Clan A can only join Clan A private channel and not Clan B private channel and vice versa.

Notice even if I had chosen a scenario with 50 clans I still would not have needed more than *one* channel group.

[willy_sunny]

Notice even if I had chosen a scenario with 50 clans I still would not have needed more than *one* channel group.

Just to mention that you'd still need to manually change each of the channels and subchannels that you've created XD

*hides*

[azzy101]

i was curious last night about peter's suggestion, tried it and it works nicely. the only issue peter is that it gives people the illusion they can join the channel if there is no password, it would be nice if we could add a custom message when someone doesent have the permission to access a specific feature / channel.

[Rabe85]

I know, its an old thread, but i have a problem with the workaround from Peter

I did it like he said (channel with needed join power 999 + channel group with join power 999). It works for normal users, but if a servergroup has "ignore channel group permissions" enabled (default for serveradmins) the user can't join that "protected" channel. If i now remove that right, i can join the channel, but i can't move, kick or ban a user anymore.
If i now set the move, kick and ban rights in the new channel group, everyone with that channel group can do the things, but thats not what i want.
So what can i do to solve the problem?

[Screech]

I still would prefer the ignore password on channel group option. By setting the password on the channel it added clear indicators (padlock, yellow channel indicator) to users that they need access to enter said channel. When using the join permissions as purposed restricted channels appear join-able to those without access until they attempt to join them. If they don't read their error log they get confused as to why they can't enter the room. Use the password/ignore password option we had was preferred to me for this reason.

[poisonpanik]

@Rabe85
Set the option you need in your client permissions

@Screech
I understand why you want this but it doesn't make sense because to have this as part of a channel group really doesn't help since you aren't assigned a (possibly new) channel group until you join that channel. Not your fault that people hear ERROR and don't bother to look at the server chat to see it.

[SilentStorm]

For Gods sake if you want ppl to have a visual indicator that they might not be able to join a channel then whats the Problem with just putting a password on those channels in addition to Peter's correct version to do this and beside the join power add ignore channel password to the channelgroup? Will still work as before with the addition that there will be an indicator.


@poisonpanik: Client Permissions are overruled by Channel & Channelgroup Permissions

@Rabe85: If you want Serveradmins to be able to join those channels (every protected channel that is) then just give them the required Join Power in the ServerAdmin Servergroup. Admin's should be allowed general Access to every Channel anyway if you ask me.

[poisonpanik]

@SilentStorm
This would still work in the client permissions because the channel group permissions, channel permissions, and channel/client permissions don't allow b_channel_join_ignore_password at all so it could not be overwritten by a channel group permission.

[Alcazar]

@poisonpanik: Client Permissions are overruled by Channel & Channelgroup Permissions

Unless you set the skip-flag or "b_client_skip_channelgroup_permissions"...