discord.js - Imagine an app•5w ago

PermissionOverwrites Why did this stop working?

                if (auditLogEntry.action !== AuditLogEvent.ChannelOverwriteDelete) return;
                const changes = auditLogEntry.changes
                const target = await guild.channels.fetch(auditLogEntry.targetId).catch(() => null)
                const overwriteId = auditLogEntry.changes.find(change => change.key === 'id')?.old;
                const type = auditLogEntry.changes.find(change => change.key === 'type')?.old;
                const allow = auditLogEntry.changes.find(change => change.key === 'allow')?.old;
                const deny = auditLogEntry.changes.find(change => change.key === 'deny')?.old;

                await target.permissionOverwrites.create(overwriteId, {
                    type,
                    allow: BigInt(allow),
                    deny: BigInt(deny),
                });

                if (auditLogEntry.action !== AuditLogEvent.ChannelOverwriteDelete) return;
                const changes = auditLogEntry.changes
                const target = await guild.channels.fetch(auditLogEntry.targetId).catch(() => null)
                const overwriteId = auditLogEntry.changes.find(change => change.key === 'id')?.old;
                const type = auditLogEntry.changes.find(change => change.key === 'type')?.old;
                const allow = auditLogEntry.changes.find(change => change.key === 'allow')?.old;
                const deny = auditLogEntry.changes.find(change => change.key === 'deny')?.old;

                await target.permissionOverwrites.create(overwriteId, {
                    type,
                    allow: BigInt(allow),
                    deny: BigInt(deny),
                });

43 Replies

d.js toolkit•5w ago

- What's your exact discord.js npm list discord.js and node node -v version? - Not a discord.js issue? Check out #other-js-ts. - Consider reading #how-to-get-help to improve your question! - Explain what exactly your issue is. - Post the full error stack trace, not just the top part! - Show your code! - Issue solved? Press the button!

Inky•5w ago

Wdym “not working”? Are you even checking that the audit log is related to channel overwrites?

undefinedOP•5w ago

Previously, I could restore old PermissionOverwrites settings using the audit log.

Inky•5w ago

But now you get an error?

undefinedOP•5w ago

yes No it works but it just creates PermissionOverwrites without the old features

Inky•5w ago

Does this event not trigger itself? Looks like a recipe for botception

undefinedOP•5w ago

we are checking to make sure that it is not the bot itself that is doing this

Inky•5w ago

Can you show the entire event?

undefinedOP•5w ago

message.txt

Inky•5w ago

I thought the overwrite id was in the entry.extra object

undefinedOP•5w ago

entry.extra object has 4 types of Role | GuildMember | { id: Snowflake; name: string; type: AuditLogOptionsType.Role } | { id: Snowflake; type: AuditLogOptionsType.Member };

Inky•5w ago

Depends on the audit log type

undefinedOP•5w ago

depends on whether permissionOverwrites itself, which we touch, is cached as I understand it, and not on what you say

Inky•5w ago

https://discord.com/developers/docs/resources/audit-log#audit-log-entry-object-optional-audit-entry-info

Discord Developer Portal

Discord Developer Portal — API Docs for Bots and Developers

Integrate your service with Discord — whether it's a bot or a game or whatever your wildest imagination can come up with.

undefinedOP•5w ago

in d.js it doesn't work like that, we may receive a role object or { id: Snowflake; name: string; type: AuditLogOptionsType.Role } if cached then there will be a role object if we deleted the role rights if not then what is above

Inky•5w ago

https://github.com/discordjs/discord.js/blob/595bded8a547276590a3d17eabb96436dd441734/packages/discord.js/src/structures/GuildAuditLogsEntry.js#L228

GitHub

discord.js/packages/discord.js/src/structures/GuildAuditLogsEntry.j...

A powerful JavaScript library for interacting with the Discord API - discordjs/discord.js

Inky•5w ago

Defaults to a raw object if it’s not cached id is guaranteed regardless Would suck if it was referring to a member who left the Guild otherwise

undefinedOP•5w ago

I made such a crutch for now because in other events the audit log does not always arrive either

        let extra = auditLogEntry.extra as any;
        if (!extra) return errorHandler(`extra не найден`);
        let typeOverwrite: number
        // @ts-ignore
        if (!extra.type) {
            // @ts-ignore
            if (!extra.name) {
                // @ts-ignore
                typeOverwrite = 1;
            } else {
                // @ts-ignore
                typeOverwrite = 0;
            }
        } else {
            // @ts-ignore
            typeOverwrite = Number(extra.type)
        }

        let extra = auditLogEntry.extra as any;
        if (!extra) return errorHandler(`extra не найден`);
        let typeOverwrite: number
        // @ts-ignore
        if (!extra.type) {
            // @ts-ignore
            if (!extra.name) {
                // @ts-ignore
                typeOverwrite = 1;
            } else {
                // @ts-ignore
                typeOverwrite = 0;
            }
        } else {
            // @ts-ignore
            typeOverwrite = Number(extra.type)
        }

Inky•5w ago

You can use the in operator for a quick type guard if ("type" in extra) typeOverwrite = extra.type

undefinedOP•5w ago

if ("type" in extra) {
    typeOverwrite = Number(extra.type); // Если свойство "type" есть, используем его
} else {
    // Если свойства "type" нет, проверяем наличие свойства "name"
    if ("name" in extra) {
        typeOverwrite = 0; // Если есть свойство "name", то это роль
    } else {
        typeOverwrite = 1; // Если нет ни "type", ни "name", то считаем это членом
    }
}

if ("type" in extra) {
    typeOverwrite = Number(extra.type); // Если свойство "type" есть, используем его
} else {
    // Если свойства "type" нет, проверяем наличие свойства "name"
    if ("name" in extra) {
        typeOverwrite = 0; // Если есть свойство "name", то это роль
    } else {
        typeOverwrite = 1; // Если нет ни "type", ни "name", то считаем это членом
    }
}

Inky•5w ago

Would be nice to have an easier type guard for this tho

undefinedOP•5w ago

Inky•5w ago

Maybe entry.actionTypeIs(ActionType.…) Yea

undefinedOP•5w ago

yes

Inky•5w ago

Honestly, I don’t see anything blatantly wrong When you say it’s created w/o the old data, do you mean all permissions are neutral/middle

undefinedOP•5w ago

yes

Inky•5w ago

Can you log allow, deny, and changes?

undefinedOP•5w ago

when i did this it started working

            await guild.channels.edit(channel.id, { permissionOverwrites: [
                {
                    id: extra.id,
                    allow: allowRaw,
                    deny: denyRaw,
                }

            await guild.channels.edit(channel.id, { permissionOverwrites: [
                {
                    id: extra.id,
                    allow: allowRaw,
                    deny: denyRaw,
                }

and now you need to specify channel.permissionOverwrites.edit(extra.id, { AddReactions: false }); which is a bit annoying because I don't get the same information from the audit log

Inky•5w ago

It’s prob easier to set them all at once Just gotta make sure that race coeditions don’t occur

undefinedOP•5w ago

another option is to simply do it in the library itself

      case AuditLogEvent.ChannelOverwriteCreate:
      case AuditLogEvent.ChannelOverwriteUpdate:
      case AuditLogEvent.ChannelOverwriteDelete:
        switch (data.options.type) {
          case AuditLogOptionsType.Role:
            this.extra = {
              id: data.options.id,
              name: data.options.role_name,
              type: AuditLogOptionsType.Role,
            };
            break;

          case AuditLogOptionsType.Member:
            this.extra = {
              id: data.options.id,
              type: AuditLogOptionsType.Member,
            };
            break;

          default:
            break;
        }
        break;

      case AuditLogEvent.ChannelOverwriteCreate:
      case AuditLogEvent.ChannelOverwriteUpdate:
      case AuditLogEvent.ChannelOverwriteDelete:
        switch (data.options.type) {
          case AuditLogOptionsType.Role:
            this.extra = {
              id: data.options.id,
              name: data.options.role_name,
              type: AuditLogOptionsType.Role,
            };
            break;

          case AuditLogOptionsType.Member:
            this.extra = {
              id: data.options.id,
              type: AuditLogOptionsType.Member,
            };
            break;

          default:
            break;
        }
        break;

Inky•5w ago

Although, it prob isn’t hard to make a function that converts between the two types easily Gl keeping that code working in future updates Oh, PermissionOverwrites.resolve alr exists

undefinedOP•5w ago

It's hard for me to translate, I don't understand everything, can you explain?

Inky•5w ago

Or is that the wrong way

undefinedOP•5w ago

Gl what is this and I understood not quite like that, some rights I need are old then this decision remains for now

Inky•5w ago

Good luck

undefinedOP•5w ago

yes, thank you, I already understood ahahahaha

Inky•5w ago

I rly don’t think it’s that hard to convert to an perm overwrite option object

const allowBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(allow));
const denyBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(deny));

const perms = {};
Object.keys(PermissionsBitField.Flags).forEach(p => (perms[p] = null));
allowBf.toArray().map(p => (perms[p] = true));
denyBf.toArray().map(p => (perms[p] = true));

return perms;

const allowBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(allow));
const denyBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(deny));

const perms = {};
Object.keys(PermissionsBitField.Flags).forEach(p => (perms[p] = null));
allowBf.toArray().map(p => (perms[p] = true));
denyBf.toArray().map(p => (perms[p] = true));

return perms;

Could do some micro optimizations to do a single loop

undefinedOP•5w ago

const allowBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(allow));
const denyBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(deny));

const perms = Object.fromEntries(
    Object.keys(PermissionsBitField.Flags).map(p => [p, null])
);

[...allowBf.toArray(), ...denyBf.toArray()].forEach(p => (perms[p] = true));

return perms;

const allowBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(allow));
const denyBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(deny));

const perms = Object.fromEntries(
    Object.keys(PermissionsBitField.Flags).map(p => [p, null])
);

[...allowBf.toArray(), ...denyBf.toArray()].forEach(p => (perms[p] = true));

return perms;

Inky•5w ago

The assignment isn’t correct in the forEach ~~Also if ur gonna do that, just throw the array into Object.from entries~~ Oh, I see Assignment still is incorrect tho. deny should be set to false

undefinedOP•5w ago

const allowBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(allow));
const denyBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(deny));

return Object.fromEntries([
    ...allowBf.toArray().map(p => [p, true]),
    ...denyBf.toArray().map(p => [p, false])
]);

const allowBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(allow));
const denyBf = new PermissionsBitField(BigInt(deny));

return Object.fromEntries([
    ...allowBf.toArray().map(p => [p, true]),
    ...denyBf.toArray().map(p => [p, false])
]);

Inky•5w ago

Then you just add the all flags at the beginning of the array

undefinedOP•5w ago

but I would still like a simpler option and not do this

Inky•5w ago

Prob just make a utility function

Gaming

Programming

PermissionOverwrites Why did this stop working?

Did you find this page helpful?