Bug 124443 - [liboscar/icq] implement require authorization
Summary: [liboscar/icq] implement require authorization
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 71660
Alias: None
Product: kopete
Classification: Applications
Component: ICQ and AIM Plugins (show other bugs)
Version: 0.11.1
Platform: unspecified Linux
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Kopete Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-03-28 21:04 UTC by Mathias Homann
Modified: 2006-08-02 10:33 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Mathias Homann 2006-03-28 21:04:16 UTC
Version:           0.11.1 (using KDE 3.5.1 Level "a" , SUSE 9.2 UNSUPPORTED)
Compiler:          gcc version 3.3.4 (pre 3.3.5 20040809)
OS:                Linux (i686) release 2.6.8-24.20-default

in my icq settings, the option "ask for authorization before people can add my to their buddy list" is selected, but still icq5 users can add me without me knowing, and send me messages without me being able to block them (obviously, related to the bug/feature request about blocking all messages from people not in my contact list).
Comment 1 Jan Ritzerfeld 2006-04-03 19:36:35 UTC
AFAIK, with the icq protocol it is impossible to keep someone from adding your contact to their list. The help text of the option "Require authorization before someone can add you to their contact list" describes this more precisely:
"[...] Check this box, and you will have to confirm any users who add you to their list before they may see your online status."

And even this does not hold true for inofficial icq clients, see the option beneath the already mentioned one above: "Respect other contacts' wish to require authorization".
Comment 2 Matt Rogers 2006-05-06 17:16:43 UTC
require authorization isn't actually implemented yet. i'll have to remove that option for now. the option is just left over from the old code.
Comment 3 Dirk Stoecker 2006-08-02 10:33:47 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 71660 ***