Teeworlds - bridge

Teeworlds

IRC / bridge

One-way IRC channel bridge. If you want to be able to send messages to IRC, contact @Dune or @heinrich5991. https://www.teeworlds.com/?page=docs&wiki=rules/irc_rules

Between 2019-04-28 00:00:00Z and 2019-04-29 00:00:00Z

[quakenet] <Dune> @Zatline might have made others?

[quakenet] <Dune> strange, teeworlds uses .local?https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1677960.html

13:58

[quakenet] <Dune> it uses .teeworlds for me

13:58

[quakenet] <Dune> "added path '$USERDIR' ('/home/_teeworlds/.local/share/teeworlds')

13:58

[quakenet] <Dune> "

14:05

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> Dune: https://github.com/teeworlds/teeworlds/blob/07fa835e0f9435de1b9b67510d6bae3aa1bd2645/src/base/system.c#L1496-L1516

teeworlds/teeworlds

A retro multiplayer shooter. Contribute to teeworlds/teeworlds development by creating an account on GitHub.

14:06

[quakenet] <Dune> so that new folder path is not automatically created it seems

14:08

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> Dune: issue reported in https://github.com/teeworlds/teeworlds/issues/1643 and fixed in https://github.com/teeworlds/teeworlds/commit/e117ee0ef1c329f3559fcfb64bd9b33e6adb82d2

Teeworlds Server fails to start (Linux) · Issue #1643 · teeworld...

I compiled the latest source on my Linux Server(Ubuntu 16.04.5 LTS | Linux 4.4.0-138-generic). I can’t start the server cause it always fails with "[5be8123c][kernel]: ERROR: couldn&#3...

Recursively create directories for the data dir · teeworlds/teewo...

Nonrecursively creating directories led to a failure -- .local/share/teeworlds could not be created if .local/share did not exit beforehand. Fixes #2014.

14:12

[quakenet] <Dune> ah, nice catch, that's on 0.7.2

[quakenet] <Oy> the rest on the list seems fixed or outdated

[quakenet] <Dune> hm

17:59

[quakenet] <Dune> Reportedly, twmaster3.teecloud.eu is sending a "near constant 20MB/s stream of UDP packets"

18:00

[quakenet] <Dune> to a 0.7.2 server

18:00

[quakenet] <Dune> reflection attack?

18:00

[quakenet] <Dune> heinrich5991 ^

18:00

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> yes

18:01

[quakenet] <Dune> is that because of the 0.6 vulnerability?

18:01

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> de*en already reported that their master server is being used for reflection attacks

18:01

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> yes

18:01

[quakenet] <Dune> :/

18:05

[quakenet] <Dune> ooh the rcon command completion thing was just a reset issue :o

18:08

[quakenet] <Oy> yeah

18:08

[quakenet] <Oy> are there still 0.6 masters running?

18:08

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> yes

18:09

[quakenet] <Oy> oh

18:09

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> in fact, I think we still have more players on 0.6 than 0.7

18:09

[quakenet] <Oy> but 0.6 masters are unfixable :(

18:12

[quakenet] <Dune> yeah

18:15

[quakenet] <Dune> there is 7 years of content on 0.6, lots of people won't easily give up on that

[quakenet] <Oy> yeah, too much time without a major release :(

18:25

[quakenet] <Dune> yeah that's the problem

18:25

[quakenet] <rand> without breaking everything

18:25

[quakenet] <Oy> but people providing the masters might get a problem with their hoster and then it closes eventually

18:26

[quakenet] <Dune> yeah it can't be worked around

18:26

[quakenet] <rand> mods are ported to 0.7 step by step

18:26

[quakenet] <Dune> some stuff won't be because their content creator is gone for years

18:26

[quakenet] <rand> 0.7 makes some mods features easier

18:27

[quakenet] <rand> unmaintained mod binaries will disappear

18:28

[quakenet] <rand> and then, when everything is calm, 0.8 will strike

18:28

[quakenet] <Oy> :P

18:29

[quakenet] <Oy> yeah, can't update when there's no src or people available doing it

18:30

[quakenet] <Oy> is there a 0.7 flagball already?

18:30

[quakenet] <Dune> nope, but was there a 0.6 flagball?

18:30

[quakenet] <rand> better being open source than lost

18:30

[quakenet] <Dune> sometimes there is source, like for ddnet and its forks and some client mods

18:31

[quakenet] <Dune> but it's just really big and their original creators are gone I guess

18:31

[quakenet] <Oy> hm, thought there was

18:31

[quakenet] <Dune> one the other side I think it's nice to only have well maintained servers :)

18:32

[quakenet] <Oy> yeah, bad when people don't update and keep security risks running

18:33

[quakenet] <Oy> i wonder if there still 0.4 or 0.5 servers running :)

18:33

[quakenet] <Dune> there were 0.4 desertcamp servers back in the 0.6 days

[quakenet] <minus> heinrich5991: deen shut their 0.6 master down, i assume?

18:56

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> I think it's just part of everyday master operation. perhaps some firewall rule is in place, I dunno. he certainly didn't shut it down for good

18:56

[quakenet] <minus> i tried pinging all 0.6 masters and none responded

18:56

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> probably hoster/manual firewall in place

18:57

[quakenet] <minus> maybe the ping thing was just wrong

18:57

[quakenet] <minus> anyway, stopped the flood by shutting down master3

18:57

[quakenet] <minus> now you don't get any servers in 0.6

19:01

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> I still get 137 servers on 0.6

19:01

[quakenet] <minus> interesting

19:02

[quakenet] <minus> did the server list query protocol change in 0.7?

19:03

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> yes

19:03

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> now it has a challenge-response before sending hte server list

19:03

[quakenet] <minus> i see

19:05

[quakenet] <rand> great work

19:11

[quakenet] <matricks_> heinrich5991: I saw somewhere a quite cool technique that increased the difficulty of the challange if it came from the same ip over and over again

19:11

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> how? :)

19:11

[quakenet] <matricks_> heinrich5991: so it started to consume a lot of cpu power on the attacker end

19:11

[quakenet] <minus> proof of work?

19:12

[quakenet] <matricks_> was something quite simple, like factorizing numbers or something like that

19:12

[quakenet] <minus> wondering if i should set up a master myself

[quakenet] <minus> heinrich5991: how do i check server count per master on 0.7?

19:20

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> do the challenge-response thing

19:20

[quakenet] <heinrich5991> don't know how to off the top of my head

19:20

[quakenet] <minus> :<

19:27

[quakenet] <deen> minus: you can also ask me directly :D

19:28

[quakenet] <minus> i could

19:28

[quakenet] <deen> it's currently being used for reflection attacks and we have a hard limit of 1000 requests / second on it to cut down on that

19:29

[quakenet] <minus> can you add a low limit per ip?

19:29

[quakenet] <deen> sure

19:30

[quakenet] <minus> i do wonder why it targets that one dude only

19:31

[quakenet] <Dune> probably because it would dilute the attack power otherwise?

19:31

[quakenet] <deen> does it? We get ~300 Mbit/s incoming from reflection attacks on ddnet servers too

19:31

[quakenet] <deen> spread across all

19:31

[quakenet] <minus> deen: you (or anyone, really) don't happen to have a tool for monitoring masters (server count)?

19:31

[quakenet] <deen> nope

19:31

[quakenet] <Dune> https://status.tw/?p=status

19:31

[quakenet] <Dune> ah, server count

19:31

[quakenet] <minus> i have this for 0.6 https://github.com/minus7/teeworlds_prometheus

minus7/teeworlds_prometheus

Prometheus exporter for the Teeworlds 0.6 server count - minus7/teeworlds_prometheus

19:32

[quakenet] <minus> that list seems quite outdated

19:35

[quakenet] <deen> minus: don't think it helps much, I see spoofed requests from different ips all the time

19:37

[quakenet] <minus> deen: how about a per-ip(hash) rule first, and a "global" rule afterwards in case >1kpps fall through the previous rule?

19:37

[quakenet] <deen> that's what I have now

19:43

[quakenet] <rand> server count per master ?

19:43

[quakenet] <rand> you could hack tw_api.py (upstream for 0.7, tag 0.6 for 0.6)

19:46

[quakenet] <rand> well: python2 tw_api.py >>> 0 servers

[quakenet] <rand> hm, for some reason, master1 does not like my server with bot…

19:58

[quakenet] <rand> dumb me with old firewall rules

Exported 98 message(s)