On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 14:40 +0930, Tim wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 11:06 -0700, Dan Thurman wrote: > > Yes, that is what I am experiencing still, even as I changed my > > privacy to say: "Allow only the users on my Buddy List", and yet > > the Authorization Request still pops up over and over for the > > same persistent requester. I am going to drop ICQ forever > > on gaim on FC if this keeps on going. I suspect that this is done > > automatically by some spammer who wants to gain illegal access via ICQ > > perhaps. > > I suspect it only blocks "messages" from going through, but still allows > authorisation requests. Else, how would you get a new user through to > you? I don't mean random people, but you'd have to pre-allow a friend, > *and* know that you had to do so before it'd work. > > Perhaps the author of Gaim would be amenable to some authorisation > filtering, that'd ignore some of the stupid attempts. > > e.g. Requests saying: "please add me" as the authorisation reason > The problem is not that someone should be able to send an authorization request the first time. The problem is that after repeatedly being denied authorization, the requester keeps on trying and every time you say "NO" - it keeps on coming. It almost seems as if the requester is a program hoping that the person under attack eventually gives in. This is an attack. Currently there is no way to block that type of attack. I would opt to have a button that you press that adds the attacking requester to the banned or blacklist so that requests of any kind from that specific requester will be blocked. The end-user-blocker will no longer be bothered by this requester again. Ever. Unless you remove them from your blacklist. Also, what happens when at one time, you allowed a requester to be part of your buddy list, only later to discover you no longer want an association to that requester, or perhaps that you accidentally allowed a requester in that you did not want - how to you force this requester OFF your buddy list as well as on the requester end so that they are not continually monitoring your on-line status activity? Currently, there is no provisions to do that. Dan
