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