Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!abhg!carpet!bill From: bill@carpet.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: Sendsys fiasco Keywords: Webber net abuse Message-ID: <109@carpet.WLK.COM> Date: 23 Jun 88 18:50:20 GMT References: <106@carpet.WLK.COM> <4552@killer.UUCP> Reply-To: bill@ssbn.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy) Followup-To: news.admin Distribution: na Organization: W.L. Kennedy Jr. and Associates Lines: 36 In article <4552@killer.UUCP> wisner@killer.UUCP (Bill Wisner) writes: >Think about what you're saying, Mr. Kennedy. Webber could not have posted >those sendsys messages anyway; he's not a news administrator. But, you say, >he could have gotten by that little restriction. Bill's quite right, of course. I don't think I was entirely unjustified in suspecting that Bob did it, but I was dead wrong. Bill and Bob have already pointed out. I have apologized to Bob for `accusing' him, I thought it was clear I only `suspected' him. The difference must be too fine. >Of course he could have. But just look at the headers! He is NOT >webber@rutgers.edu or rutgers!webber; in fact, I think there are a total >of something like five people who actually have accounts on rutgers itself. >Webber is at athos, or aramis, or porthos, or even constance. Not rutgers. Correct again. Bob's article says he only got a megabyte or so, and that reinforces my real complaint. It's not the replies that are at issue, it's the discussion that ensues. If we find and stop the forger then the discussion dries up. I still think it is a childish prank and that the news administrators should find out who did it and stop them. I sincerely hope that Bob's suggestion that a backbone administrator did it is wrong. That would, in my opinion, be beneath their dignity. I'll not clutter further with discussion I've already objected to. On the positive side it would be useful to me and similar minimally skilled news administrators to have someone post some tips on how to prevent such folly. I feel fairly sure that a reader at ssbn could have done it, sure enough to check the logs to make sure they hadn't. Are there ways we should set up permissions so that only the news administrator can easily do some things? We have seen enough forgeries in the last few weeks to justify an article in this group on ways to make them harder to do. RTFM doesn't help, TFM is silent on this topic. Maybe Rick will post something when he gets back from SF, I hope so. I also hope it isn't as clumsy and having to apply all of control by hand. -- Bill Kennedy Internet: bill@ssbn.WLK.COM Usenet: { killer | att-cb | ihnp4!tness7 }!ssbn!bill