Bombing newsgroups

75 views
Skip to first unread message

Gene W. Smith

unread,
Jul 11, 1993, 7:46:26 AM7/11/93
to

Now that people are sendsys bombing newsgroups as well as individuals,
is somebody going to finally fix this thing? Or we could just keep
making Death of the Usenet jokes until it dies, I guess.

--
Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/IWR/Ruprecht-Karls University
gsm...@kalliope.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 11, 1993, 1:05:13 PM7/11/93
to
gsm...@lauren.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith) writes:
>
>Now that people are sendsys bombing newsgroups as well as individuals,
>is somebody going to finally fix this thing? Or we could just keep
>making Death of the Usenet jokes until it dies, I guess.

[from "index retromod"]
=-=-=-=-=-=

size name description

2761 armor.desc Description of the "Automated Mischief
Obliteration Routine" -- a sendsys defense.
(suitable for C News sites, only)

2501 armor.instr Instructions for installing ARMOR.
(suitable for C News sites, only)

1703 sane.sendsys C News sendsys modification to ignore
worldwide sendsys messages.

"send retromod armor.desc" to get the description of ARMOR, etc.
archive...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us
The size limit is 150kb per request.
=-=-=-=-=-=
(Other commands are "help" and "index")

Hope this helps.

Dick
--
Richard E. Depew, Munroe Falls, OH r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (home)
``The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not
make himself a nuisance to other people.'' -- John Stuart Mill

John De Armond

unread,
Jul 12, 1993, 1:51:11 AM7/12/93
to
gsm...@lauren.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith) writes:


>Now that people are sendsys bombing newsgroups as well as individuals,
>is somebody going to finally fix this thing? Or we could just keep
>making Death of the Usenet jokes until it dies, I guess.

Ohmygawd NO! We musn't remove this valuable resource from news systems.
Sendsys must remain intact just in case one of your or my neighboors
wants to snoop at who we send and receive news to/from. This facility
is MUCH too valuable to relegate to the rubbish heap.

John

Hint to the sarcastically challenged: sit on your fingers, count to 1000.
You'll be OK.
--
John De Armond, WD4OQC | (Pardon the inconvenience while we
Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | remodel this .signature)
Marietta, Ga |
j...@dixie.com |

John De Armond

unread,
Jul 12, 1993, 1:56:54 AM7/12/93
to
r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:


>size name description

>2761 armor.desc Description of the "Automated Mischief
> Obliteration Routine" -- a sendsys defense.
> (suitable for C News sites, only)

>2501 armor.instr Instructions for installing ARMOR.
> (suitable for C News sites, only)

>1703 sane.sendsys C News sendsys modification to ignore
> worldwide sendsys messages.

Tell me you're kidding, Dick. Almost 8k of stuff to stop a sendsys?

Bet I can do that in less than 400 bytes. Put the text between the
snip snips in place of ~NEWS/bin/ctl/sendsys (C news pre-performance release)

-------- snip ----------------
#! /bin/sh
# sendsys - mail sys file to sender identified in stdin's headers

# =()<. ${NEWSCONFIG-@<NEWSCONFIG>@}>()=
. ${NEWSCONFIG-/usr/lib/news/bin/config}
export NEWSCTL NEWSBIN NEWSARTS
PATH=$NEWSCTL/bin:$NEWSBIN/relay:$NEWSBIN:$NEWSPATH ; export PATH
umask $NEWSUMASK

SENDER="`newsreply`"
echo "$NEWSCTL/sys was requested by $SENDER. Not Sent" | mail $NEWSMASTER

------ snip ----------------

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 12, 1993, 7:29:28 AM7/12/93
to
j...@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:
>
>
>>size name description
>
>>2761 armor.desc Description of the "Automated Mischief
>> Obliteration Routine" -- a sendsys defense.
>> (suitable for C News sites, only)
>
>>2501 armor.instr Instructions for installing ARMOR.
>> (suitable for C News sites, only)
>
>>1703 sane.sendsys C News sendsys modification to ignore
>> worldwide sendsys messages.
>
>Tell me you're kidding, Dick. Almost 8k of stuff to stop a sendsys?
>
>Bet I can do that in less than 400 bytes. Put the text between the
>snip snips in place of ~NEWS/bin/ctl/sendsys (C news pre-performance release)
[...]

Cute, but not very functional. :-)

"sane.sendsys" selectively ignores sendsys messages that have no
Distribution header, or a "world" distribution. Other sendsys
messages still work.

"ARMOR" protects a list of sites, automatically issues a cancel
for a sendsys attack against any of them (unless the message has a
particular distribution), and sends a warning message to the admin of
the target site (and others) containing the "Path" header for tracking
purposes. The idea is to respond as quickly as possible to an attack.

Daniel J. Karnes

unread,
Jul 12, 1993, 11:56:22 AM7/12/93
to


Besides... You never know when you might want to jack up somebody's
mail spool eh?


-djk

John De Armond

unread,
Jul 13, 1993, 2:19:44 AM7/13/93
to
r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:

> Cute, but not very functional. :-)


About as functional as sendsys itself. Notice my script tells me who
asked for it. So far not a single sendsys that has landed at this site
has been valid. Worthless feature.

> "ARMOR" protects a list of sites, automatically issues a cancel
>for a sendsys attack against any of them (unless the message has a
>particular distribution), and sends a warning message to the admin of
>the target site (and others) containing the "Path" header for tracking
>purposes. The idea is to respond as quickly as possible to an attack.

Is that your little jewel that has generated over 2000 cancel messages
in the last 24 hours at my site? If so, looks like you thought this
one out about as well as you did the last one.

In any event, this is silly. Almost by definition it cannot work as you
intend and only adds to the traffic. The sendsys message is processed
immediately when it comes in. Any cancel will work only by luck if it
happens to be interpreted before the actual sendsys is rebatched for
downstream sites.

The solution to the sendsys problem is simply to disable it. I consider
it criminally negligent to leave it enabled.

Hey Dick, while you're playing around with network-paralzying programs,
why not write one that will forge a sendsys targeted at every site
which responds to a request? Now THAT would be fun to watch.

John

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 13, 1993, 12:45:51 PM7/13/93
to
In article <2gv...@dixie.com> j...@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:
[...]

>> "ARMOR" protects a list of sites, automatically issues a cancel
>>for a sendsys attack against any of them (unless the message has a
>>particular distribution), and sends a warning message to the admin of
>>the target site (and others) containing the "Path" header for tracking
>>purposes. The idea is to respond as quickly as possible to an attack.
>
>Is that your little jewel that has generated over 2000 cancel messages
>in the last 24 hours at my site? If so, looks like you thought this
>one out about as well as you did the last one.

Unlikely, it only responds to sendsys messages, and it notifies
me if it responds to one (and it has been silent).

>In any event, this is silly. Almost by definition it cannot work as you
>intend and only adds to the traffic. The sendsys message is processed
>immediately when it comes in.

This is no longer the case with up-to-date news systems...
sendsys is now delayed for (in the case of C News) 24 hours to allow
the malicious ones to be canceled before the response is sent out.

>Any cancel will work only by luck if it
>happens to be interpreted before the actual sendsys is rebatched for
>downstream sites.

A quick-enough cancel can hold the number of responses down to
700 or so... much more managable than many thousands!

>The solution to the sendsys problem is simply to disable it. I consider
>it criminally negligent to leave it enabled.

I agree that it should not be enabled for world-wide distributions,
but we find it useful with more restricted distributions like "akron",
"cle", or "oh".

>Hey Dick, while you're playing around with network-paralzying programs,
>why not write one that will forge a sendsys targeted at every site
>which responds to a request? Now THAT would be fun to watch.

'cuz I'm one of the *good* guys! I only spam groups by accident!

Your flood of cancels is probably some good citizen cleaning up
another Fido-Net spew. An inode is too precious a thing to waste, at
least under sysV.

Dick
--
Richard E. Depew, Rootstown, OH r...@uhura.neoucom.edu (work)
``The freshmen bring a little knowledge in and the seniors take none
out, so it accumulates through the years.'' -- A. Lawrence Lowell,
President of Harvard

Cousin It

unread,
Jul 13, 1993, 1:26:55 PM7/13/93
to
r...@uhura.neoucom.edu (Richard E. Depew) writes:
|In article <2gv...@dixie.com> j...@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:

|>Is that your little jewel that has generated over 2000 cancel messages
|>in the last 24 hours at my site? If so, looks like you thought this
|>one out about as well as you did the last one.

Not likely. I just had a look see at control, most of the
messages looked normal enough, but a whole load did not. Apparently,
the daemon @utexas is cleaning up the mess his mail to news gateway
caused by cancelling all the sendsys reports sent to soc.motss. There
were 380 cancellations of that type. [Oddly enough, I didn't see any
cancellation of John Stanley's forged newgroup/sendsys, although the
original is still in our spool. (No help in the path Dick)]

| This is no longer the case with up-to-date news systems...
|sendsys is now delayed for (in the case of C News) 24 hours to allow
|the malicious ones to be canceled before the response is sent out.

Thats a good thing. Too bad not everyone can use updated C
News.

| 'cuz I'm one of the *good* guys! I only spam groups by accident!

I'll resist the laughter that is building up inside
me.

| Your flood of cancels is probably some good citizen cleaning up
|another Fido-Net spew. An inode is too precious a thing to waste, at
|least under sysV.

Those types of cancels [IMHO] should really have a local
distribution. Not that I disagree with the reasonings. But...

Brandon Magee c...@cs.brandeis.edu
Business Manager/Acting General Manager Live Music Engineer
WBRS 100 FM, Waltham Ma. WB...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
All Genre Music Programming Free Live Music-4 times weekly

Daniel J. Karnes

unread,
Jul 13, 1993, 1:48:37 PM7/13/93
to
In article <2gv...@dixie.com> j...@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:

>Hey Dick, while you're playing around with network-paralzying programs,
>why not write one that will forge a sendsys targeted at every site
>which responds to a request? Now THAT would be fun to watch.
>
>John
>

Shhhhhhhhhhh! This network has EARS! :)


-djk

vineland expatriate

unread,
Jul 13, 1993, 3:45:03 PM7/13/93
to
In article <1993Jul13.1...@uhura.neoucom.edu> r...@uhura.neoucom.edu (Richard E. Depew) writes:

> 'cuz I'm one of the *good* guys! I only spam groups by accident!

No, Dick, you're not. Now please crawl back under your rock.

Peter

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 13, 1993, 8:23:35 PM7/13/93
to
c...@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Cousin It) writes:
>r...@uhura.neoucom.edu (Richard E. Depew) writes:
>|In article <2gv...@dixie.com> j...@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>
>|>Is that your little jewel that has generated over 2000 cancel messages
>|>in the last 24 hours at my site? If so, looks like you thought this
>|>one out about as well as you did the last one.
>
> Not likely. I just had a look see at control, most of the
>messages looked normal enough, but a whole load did not. Apparently,
>the daemon @utexas is cleaning up the mess his mail to news gateway
>caused by cancelling all the sendsys reports sent to soc.motss. There
>were 380 cancellations of that type. [Oddly enough, I didn't see any
>cancellation of John Stanley's forged newgroup/sendsys, although the
>original is still in our spool. (No help in the path Dick)]

Thanks for clearing up that little mystery, Cuz. I don't get
soc.motss, so I didn't see the cancels.

ARMOR is currently protecting two other mail-to-news sites, and
any C News site is welcome to join.

>| This is no longer the case with up-to-date news systems...
>|sendsys is now delayed for (in the case of C News) 24 hours to allow
>|the malicious ones to be canceled before the response is sent out.
>
> Thats a good thing. Too bad not everyone can use updated C
>News.

I agree.

>| 'cuz I'm one of the *good* guys! I only spam groups by accident!
>
> I'll resist the laughter that is building up inside
>me.

And I had great difficulty leaving the smiley off. Glad you
liked it.

>| Your flood of cancels is probably some good citizen cleaning up
>|another Fido-Net spew. An inode is too precious a thing to waste, at
>|least under sysV.
>
> Those types of cancels [IMHO] should really have a local
>distribution. Not that I disagree with the reasonings. But...

Well, they wouldn't do you any good then, now would they? I find
it difficult to believe that someone would complain about a good
citizen cleaning up a mess that some sociopath has made!

Dick
--

Lawrence Foard

unread,
Jul 13, 1993, 9:23:43 PM7/13/93
to

I thought it was eyes.

I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to do something
like that, somehow I think word might reach the FBI (before
or after it reachs the headlines?).

Of course it would be foolish to leave sendsys enabled waiting
for someone to toast the net into oblivion.
--
------ Forgive me for I have eaten of beans and believed in irrational .
\ / numbers. . .
\ / . . .
\/ . . . .

Cousin It

unread,
Jul 14, 1993, 12:37:05 AM7/14/93
to
r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:
|c...@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Cousin It) writes:
[...]

|>| Your flood of cancels is probably some good citizen cleaning up
|>|another Fido-Net spew. An inode is too precious a thing to waste, at
|>|least under sysV.
|>
|> Those types of cancels [IMHO] should really have a local
|>distribution. Not that I disagree with the reasonings. But...

| Well, they wouldn't do you any good then, now would they? I find
|it difficult to believe that someone would complain about a good
|citizen cleaning up a mess that some sociopath has made!

Actually, fidonet spews are [to my knowledge] never done in a
malicious manner, or for that matter intentionally. So, I don't think
a sociopath has anything to do with it. Misconfigured gateways, on the
other hand... A very similar situation to the ARRM Spew, a minor code
error. In any case [And I fully admit that I may have missed major
spews], I haven't seen a devastating spew. And as for good, they would
clean up the posts on a specific machine. If people are having a
problem with the machine losing inodes, they can cancel it themselves.
[OK, I admit, I'm super cautious when it comes to the use of cancels.
However, and I am sure you are happy to know, I have no problem with
cancelling a malicious sendsys [and which aren't?]]

Jim Littlefield

unread,
Jul 14, 1993, 8:27:52 AM7/14/93
to
Richard E. Depew (r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us) wrote:

: Well, they wouldn't do you any good then, now would they? I find


: it difficult to believe that someone would complain about a good
: citizen cleaning up a mess that some sociopath has made!

You mean like ARMM?

--

Jim Littlefield "Only two things are infinite; the universe
<lit...@hks.com> and human stupidity, and I am not sure about
the former." -- Albert Einstein

L. Todd Masco

unread,
Jul 14, 1993, 9:27:39 AM7/14/93
to
In article <cuz.74...@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu> c...@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Cousin It) writes:
> Actually, fidonet spews are [to my knowledge] never done in a
>malicious manner, or for that matter intentionally. So, I don't think
>a sociopath has anything to do with it.

I thought that Fidonet was largely PCs: does it matter if it's the
sociopath running the system or the sociopath who designed the system?
--
Todd Masco | SysAdmin |"Free speech is the right to
cac...@clinton.com | Clinton Group, Inc. | shout 'theatre' in a crowded fire."

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 14, 1993, 12:22:45 PM7/14/93
to
ent...@world.std.com (Lawrence Foard) writes:
>In article <1993Jul13.104837.27298@crash> d...@crash.cts.com (Daniel J. Karnes) writes:
>>In article <2gv...@dixie.com> j...@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>>
>>>Hey Dick, while you're playing around with network-paralzying programs,
>>>why not write one that will forge a sendsys targeted at every site
>>>which responds to a request? Now THAT would be fun to watch.
>>>
>>>John
>>>
>>
>>Shhhhhhhhhhh! This network has EARS! :)
>
>I thought it was eyes.
>
>I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to do something
>like that, somehow I think word might reach the FBI (before
>or after it reachs the headlines?).

Don't count on it -- this is Usenet.

John De Armond has provided a description of what we might term
the "Usenet Doomsday Device" (UDD) -- something that Dr. Strangelove
himself would have loved.

What if someone builds one, and announces a policy of mutually
assured destruction? "Don't sendsys bomb me, or the fallout will get
you."

What if someone sendsys bombs that site anyhow? Who is responsible
for the resulting temporary melt-down of the net? The person who
described the idea (John)? The person who named it (me)? The person
who built it (JP :-) )? The person who triggered it (an8785 :-) ) ?
The admins of sites that responded to a world-wide sendsys? All of the
above? Did a single anarchist cause WWI, or did he simply trigger it by
accident?

>Of course it would be foolish to leave sendsys enabled waiting
>for someone to toast the net into oblivion.

Agreed. We are all responsible for doing what we can to prevent
disasters.

Dick
--

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 14, 1993, 12:51:32 PM7/14/93
to
c...@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Cousin It) writes:
>r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:
>|c...@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Cousin It) writes:
[...]
>|> Those types of cancels [IMHO] should really have a local
>|>distribution. Not that I disagree with the reasonings. But...
>
>| Well, they wouldn't do you any good then, now would they? I find
>|it difficult to believe that someone would complain about a good
>|citizen cleaning up a mess that some sociopath has made!
>
> Actually, fidonet spews are [to my knowledge] never done in a
>malicious manner, or for that matter intentionally. So, I don't think
>a sociopath has anything to do with it.

I was referring to the sociopath who sendsys bombed the soc-motss
email-to-news gateway at utexas.edu... not to my incorrect speculation.

>Misconfigured gateways, on the
>other hand... A very similar situation to the ARRM Spew, a minor code
>error. In any case [And I fully admit that I may have missed major
>spews], I haven't seen a devastating spew. And as for good, they would
>clean up the posts on a specific machine. If people are having a
>problem with the machine losing inodes, they can cancel it themselves.
>[OK, I admit, I'm super cautious when it comes to the use of cancels.

Yes, overly cautious. :-)

>However, and I am sure you are happy to know, I have no problem with
>cancelling a malicious sendsys [and which aren't?]]

Would you like a copy of ARMOR?

Dick
--

LCDR Michael E. Dobson

unread,
Jul 14, 1993, 1:30:37 PM7/14/93
to
In article <2gv...@dixie.com> j...@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>
[debate with Depew deleted]

>In any event, this is silly. Almost by definition it cannot work as you
>intend and only adds to the traffic. The sendsys message is processed
>immediately when it comes in. Any cancel will work only by luck if it
>happens to be interpreted before the actual sendsys is rebatched for
>downstream sites.
>

Only on B-news or old C-news sites. C-news performance release delays the
sending of a response to sendsys and version control messages for a day or
two to see if a cancel shows up. I have received many requests for a
sendsys but have sent out none or only a small number. INN does something
similar I believe.

>The solution to the sendsys problem is simply to disable it. I consider
>it criminally negligent to leave it enabled.
>

With the above news software running, it can be left enabled. Since the
news admin is notified when a request comes in, a local cancel can also be
done if the request is actually a bomb thus preventing a site from
responding even if a cancel doesn't arrive in time.

Daniel J. Karnes

unread,
Jul 14, 1993, 1:27:32 PM7/14/93
to
In article <CA4r...@world.std.com> ent...@world.std.com (Lawrence Foard) writes:

>I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to do something
>like that, somehow I think word might reach the FBI (before
>or after it reachs the headlines?).
>
>Of course it would be foolish to leave sendsys enabled waiting
>for someone to toast the net into oblivion.
>--
>------ Forgive me for I have eaten of beans and believed in irrational .
>\ / numbers. . .
> \ / . . .
> \/ . . . .

THAT prank would exceed the rtm thing in 1988 by FAR. A few months or
a year ago there was a thread in which several people expressed their
opinion that s-ndsys was a viable means for controlling net.dickheads-
I said then and I'll say now that rather then that perhaps someone
needs to set up a 'twitserv' (or something) - You know, a system that
receives 'complaints' from users about other uses and occasionally
sends out an automatic mail message that says something like:
'this system has received xxx complaints about your xxx and this
message is an automatic reminder of xxx' - perhaps even send a nice
big copy of the USENET guidelines along too! :))

Of course, at this time, I'd probably have several of those messages
in my mailbox. :>

-djk

Hmmmmmmmm......... Maybe I'll set up 'twitserv' myself.... :-)

-djk

Dave Hayes

unread,
Jul 14, 1993, 3:04:40 PM7/14/93
to
> Well, they wouldn't do you any good then, now would they? I find
>it difficult to believe that someone would complain about a good
>citizen cleaning up a mess that some sociopath has made!
>--
>Richard E. Depew, Munroe Falls, OH r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (home)
>``The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not
> make himself a nuisance to other people.'' -- John Stuart Mill

Even your quote is far afield of reasonability.

Consider...you are being a nuisance to be by cleaning up a mess which IMO
may not have been made by a sociopath. At least I'd like to be able to see
the mess and judge for myself what is and isn't going on.

But you are imposing your definition of sociopath upon me, and that is
far from reasonable. By your own words and precepts, I demand that you
restrict your liberty.
--
Dave Hayes - Institutional Network & Communications - JPL/NASA - Pasadena CA
da...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov da...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov ...usc!elroy!dxh

Love thy neighbor as thyself, but choose your neighborhood.

vineland expatriate

unread,
Jul 14, 1993, 5:08:03 PM7/14/93
to
In article <1993Jul14.102732.20584@crash> d...@crash.cts.com (Daniel J. Karnes) writes:

>Of course, at this time, I'd probably have several of those messages
>in my mailbox. :>
>
>-djk

yeah, after you forged the posts on news.announce.important about your wife
finally wising up you might have gotten one or two, eh?

Peter

Cousin It

unread,
Jul 15, 1993, 3:23:30 AM7/15/93
to
r...@uhura.neoucom.edu (Richard E. Depew) writes:
|c...@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Cousin It) writes:

|> Actually, fidonet spews are [to my knowledge] never done in a
|>malicious manner, or for that matter intentionally. So, I don't think
|>a sociopath has anything to do with it.

| I was referring to the sociopath who sendsys bombed the soc-motss
|email-to-news gateway at utexas.edu... not to my incorrect speculation.

I have never had a problem with a cancel in those cases.

|>[OK, I admit, I'm super cautious when it comes to the use of cancels.

| Yes, overly cautious. :-)

I wouldn't say that. But then again, overly cautious is not
necessarily a bad thing.

|>However, and I am sure you are happy to know, I have no problem with
|>cancelling a malicious sendsys [and which aren't?]]

| Would you like a copy of ARMOR?

No, thank you. I'm quite set here.

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 17, 1993, 10:57:41 AM7/17/93
to
da...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>> Well, they wouldn't do you any good then, now would they? I find
>>it difficult to believe that someone would complain about a good
>>citizen cleaning up a mess that some sociopath has made!
>>--
>>Richard E. Depew, Munroe Falls, OH r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (home)
>>``The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not
>> make himself a nuisance to other people.'' -- John Stuart Mill
>
>Even your quote is far afield of reasonability.
>
>Consider...you are being a nuisance to be by cleaning up a mess which IMO
>may not have been made by a sociopath. At least I'd like to be able to see
>the mess and judge for myself what is and isn't going on.

I didn't clean up the mess, I was defending the good citizen who
cleaned it up for everyone else. But I see that I may have been
jumping to conclusions. Perhaps the person who sendsys bombed the
soc-motss mail-to-news gateway was not a sociopath but a concerned
citizen who merely wanted to demonstrate a flaw in the mail-to-news
gateway -- namely that it was susceptable to such mail bombing. So
instead of unleashing a sendsys attack on a single site, he sent a
sendsys bomb that resulted in every site that subscribes to soc.motss
getting a copy of the sys file of every site that responded to the
sendsys message. Who knows, perhaps some sites *wanted* these sys
files? Yes, that might be the case. The idiot who sent out cancel
messages for those sys files is denying the right of the readers of
soc.motss to choose for themselves whether or not to skip those files,
and, worse, is deleting information from databases on computers all
over the world... Dave, you should probably call CERT about this to
warn them that a malicious hacker is destroying data world-wide!

>But you are imposing your definition of sociopath upon me, and that is
>far from reasonable. By your own words and precepts, I demand that you
>restrict your liberty.

Yes, Dave. I see now that I have made a nuisance of myself by
thanking someone. How terribly thoughtless of me! It flies in the
face of established Usenet tradition! Anarchy means that no one
should help anyone else. Articles are sacred and disk space is
cheap. Deleting the spew of a sendsys bomb might set a terrible
precedent that would set us on the slippery slope to chaos. How could
I have been so stupid?

Dick

Dave Hayes

unread,
Jul 17, 1993, 12:58:31 PM7/17/93
to
>da...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>>Consider...you are being a nuisance to be by cleaning up a mess which IMO
>>may not have been made by a sociopath. At least I'd like to be able to see
>>the mess and judge for myself what is and isn't going on.

Mr. Depew writes:
>files? Yes, that might be the case. The idiot who sent out cancel
>messages for those sys files is denying the right of the readers of
>soc.motss to choose for themselves whether or not to skip those files,
>and, worse, is deleting information from databases on computers all
>over the world...

Hey, some people (no joke) get a KICK out of seeing stuff like this.
I don't agree that the person who sent the sys files is a sociopath,
but I do agree that the act was unreasonable. The point I'm trying to
make is that your definitions and mine (and thus yours and others) of
what a sociopath is are quite different.

>>But you are imposing your definition of sociopath upon me, and that is
>>far from reasonable. By your own words and precepts, I demand that you
>>restrict your liberty.
> Yes, Dave. I see now that I have made a nuisance of myself by
>thanking someone.

You are avoiding the comment. You didn't make a nuisance of yourself by
thanking someone, but you did by imposing your definition of sociopath
on me.

>``The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not
> make himself a nuisance to other people.'' -- John Stuart Mill

So restrict your liberty! Or are you willing to admit that the above
assertion is unworkable?


--
Dave Hayes - Institutional Network & Communications - JPL/NASA - Pasadena CA
da...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov da...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov ...usc!elroy!dxh

Democracy is a device that insures we shall be governed no better
than we deserve.
-- George Bernard Shaw

UUNORTH Administration

unread,
Jul 18, 1993, 8:59:46 AM7/18/93
to
John De Armond (j...@dixie.com) wrote:
: r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:

: > "ARMOR" protects a list of sites, automatically issues a cancel


: >for a sendsys attack against any of them (unless the message has a

: ......

: Is that your little jewel that has generated over 2000 cancel messages


: in the last 24 hours at my site? If so, looks like you thought this
: one out about as well as you did the last one.

Hmmm. Marginally better than a sendsys bomb itself. Ay least
it appears in junk rather than my mailbox.

Hmmm. Marginally worse than a sendsys bomb itself. At least it
can't be causght by my elm filter.

--
UUNORTH Administration uun...@uunorth.north.net
UUNORTH INC: UUCP & IP Connectivity Across Canada and the Northern USA
UUCP $2.50/hour, Internet connections from $1.25/hour. Call for info
Voice: (416) 225-UNIX Fax: (416) 225-0525
--
UUNORTH Administration uun...@uunorth.north.net
UUNORTH INC: UUCP & IP Connectivity Across Canada and the Northern USA
UUCP $2.50/hour, Internet connections from $1.25/hour. Call for info
Voice: (416) 225-UNIX Fax: (416) 225-0525

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 19, 1993, 6:09:06 PM7/19/93
to
da...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>>da...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>>>Consider...you are being a nuisance to be by cleaning up a mess which IMO
>>>may not have been made by a sociopath. At least I'd like to be able to see
>>>the mess and judge for myself what is and isn't going on.
>
>Mr. Depew writes:
>>files? Yes, that might be the case. The idiot who sent out cancel
>>messages for those sys files is denying the right of the readers of
>>soc.motss to choose for themselves whether or not to skip those files,
>>and, worse, is deleting information from databases on computers all
>>over the world...
>
>Hey, some people (no joke) get a KICK out of seeing stuff like this.
>I don't agree that the person who sent the sys files is a sociopath,
>but I do agree that the act was unreasonable. The point I'm trying to
>make is that your definitions and mine (and thus yours and others) of
>what a sociopath is are quite different.

OK. I'll back off "sociopath" and substitute "delinquent".

>>>But you are imposing your definition of sociopath upon me, and that is
>>>far from reasonable. By your own words and precepts, I demand that you
>>>restrict your liberty.
>> Yes, Dave. I see now that I have made a nuisance of myself by
>>thanking someone.
>
>You are avoiding the comment. You didn't make a nuisance of yourself by
>thanking someone, but you did by imposing your definition of sociopath
>on me.

The only one who "imposed" anything on any of us was the
delinquent. He made a mess. A good citizen cleaned it up. I offered
an opinion. You objected to the clean-up. Some people just don't
know how to accept a favor!

>>``The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not
>> make himself a nuisance to other people.'' -- John Stuart Mill
>
>So restrict your liberty! Or are you willing to admit that the above
>assertion is unworkable?

I have done that by agreeing to drop the word "sociopath" in this
post so as not to make a nuisance of myself in your estimation.

Yes, the word "nuisance" is overly broad, but it does convey the
idea that we have responsibilities to others. I'll try a different
quote. :-)

[Another USENET institutuion -- quote wars!]

>Democracy is a device that insures we shall be governed no better
>than we deserve.
> -- George Bernard Shaw

Good quote, Dave!

Best wishes,


Dick
--
Richard E. Depew, Munroe Falls, OH r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (home)

``The greatest blessing of our democracy is freedom. But in the last
analysis, our only freedom is the freedom to discipline ourselves.''
-- Bernard Baruch

Dave Hayes

unread,
Jul 20, 1993, 7:53:15 PM7/20/93
to
r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes on the odd numbered >'s.
da...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes on the even numbered >'s.

>>Hey, some people (no joke) get a KICK out of seeing stuff like this.
>>I don't agree that the person who sent the sys files is a sociopath,
>>but I do agree that the act was unreasonable. The point I'm trying to
>>make is that your definitions and mine (and thus yours and others) of
>>what a sociopath is are quite different.
> OK. I'll back off "sociopath" and substitute "delinquent".

Even that word isn't enough. You'd be safer not labeling the actor and just
labeling the action...but then the action is only "marginally annoying" to
me..

> The only one who "imposed" anything on any of us was the
>delinquent. He made a mess. A good citizen cleaned it up. I offered
>an opinion. You objected to the clean-up. Some people just don't
>know how to accept a favor!

Ok, granted...you just offered an opinion. I am turning around and offering
you mine in the hope that you will someday see for yourself what I am trying
to say. I realize that you won't *now*...but some experience you have in
the future will teach it to you far better than I ever could.

>>>``The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not
>>> make himself a nuisance to other people.'' -- John Stuart Mill
>>So restrict your liberty! Or are you willing to admit that the above
>>assertion is unworkable?
> I have done that by agreeing to drop the word "sociopath" in this
>post so as not to make a nuisance of myself in your estimation.

"I consider you a nuisance unless you cease and desist all activity with
regards to your retroactive moderation proposal(s). That means you cannot
argue in favor of it, implement it, or cause others to implement it...or
you are a nuisance to me. "

So, as I see it, you have two choices. You can either back completely off
of the retroactive moderation stuff, or you can understand exactly how
one can hold people emotional hostage by claiming that someone is a nuisance
(or annoyance or offensive or etc.).

Which will it be?

>>Democracy is a device that insures we shall be governed no better
>>than we deserve.

> Good quote, Dave!

Thank you.

>``The greatest blessing of our democracy is freedom. But in the last
> analysis, our only freedom is the freedom to discipline ourselves.''

So are you going to grant that freedom to your fellow net.poster by allowing
them to post off-topic with no repercussions?

Try this one:

"The original purpose of cultivating restraint is so that eventually...
one will not need to have restraint."


--
Dave Hayes - Institutional Network & Communications - JPL/NASA - Pasadena CA
da...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov da...@jato.jpl.nasa.gov ...usc!elroy!dxh

A man was claiming to be a Prophet. He was taken before the Church.
"Prophets reveal miracles," said the Minister. "What is yours?"
The man replied: "I have the ability to read thoughts. Right now
you are all thinking that I am lying."

Dennis Wicks

unread,
Jul 21, 1993, 11:46:37 AM7/21/93
to
In article <22i0hb$e...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov>
da...@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:

[Referring to: r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew)]


>
>"I consider you a nuisance unless you cease and desist all activity with
>regards to your retroactive moderation proposal(s). That means you cannot
>argue in favor of it, implement it, or cause others to implement it...or
>you are a nuisance to me. "
>

What he said!

I can't believe that this subject is still being debated! Over
the years I have noticed that all threads die eventually, but
this one seems to have an immortality of its own. And it is
definitely becoming a nuisance. Therefore I demand that R.E.D.
immediatly cease and desist all activity of any type pertaining
to retroactive moderation, including but not limited to,
discussion, posting, advocating the use of, creating or
distributing software for, and/or using such software or other
devices for accomplishing said retroactive moderation.

Alex Batyi

unread,
Jul 22, 1993, 4:50:17 PM7/22/93
to
In article <22joct$1...@nwfocus.wa.com> gu...@halcyon.com (Dennis Wicks) writes:
>I can't believe that this subject is still being debated!

Believe it.

>Therefore I demand that R.E.D.
>immediatly cease and desist all activity of any type pertaining
>to retroactive moderation, including but not limited to,
>discussion, posting, advocating the use of, creating or
>distributing software for, and/or using such software or other
>devices for accomplishing said retroactive moderation.

Yeah, right. This guys skull is like several inches thich.
He will continue to waste our collective money waving his
stupid ARMM flag until hell freezes over. There have been several
chances for him to count the votes against him and he continues to
think that not enough people have heard his idea or somthing. At
any rate he continues to post and draw flamage increasing the S/N ratio.
The only suggestion I can come up with is getting the discussion
confined to alt.fan.whatever his name is. (As if I can forget it.)

Hey RED! Shut up already!
--
AJB N3JQB +1 215 785 6644 UUCP:rescon!bud
Quote:"If you lose your memory, forget it!" b...@pacs.pha.pa.us
Proverb:"The sooner you get behind, the longer you have to catch up."

L. Todd Masco

unread,
Jul 23, 1993, 9:26:10 AM7/23/93
to
In article <13...@rescon.UUCP> b...@rescon.UUCP (Alex Batyi) writes:
>In article <22joct$1...@nwfocus.wa.com> gu...@halcyon.com (Dennis Wicks) writes:
>>I can't believe that this subject is still being debated!
>
>Believe it.
>
>>Therefore I demand that R.E.D.
>>immediatly cease and desist all activity of any type pertaining
>>to retroactive moderation, including but not limited to,
>>discussion, posting, advocating the use of, creating or
>>distributing software for, and/or using such software or other
>>devices for accomplishing said retroactive moderation.
>
>Yeah, right. This guys skull is like several inches thich.
>He will continue to waste our collective money waving his
>stupid ARMM flag until hell freezes over. There have been several
>chances for him to count the votes against him and he continues to
>think that not enough people have heard his idea or somthing. At
>any rate he continues to post and draw flamage increasing the S/N ratio.
>The only suggestion I can come up with is getting the discussion
>confined to alt.fan.whatever his name is. (As if I can forget it.)

It's important to note that if any of these people were retro-
moderators, Dick, your posts would have been nuked long ago.

Feel better about your proposal now?

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 24, 1993, 6:31:13 PM7/24/93
to
b...@rescon.UUCP (Alex Batyi) writes:
>In article <22joct$1...@nwfocus.wa.com> gu...@halcyon.com (Dennis Wicks) writes:
>>I can't believe that this subject is still being debated!
>
>Believe it.
>
>>Therefore I demand that R.E.D.
>>immediatly cease and desist all activity of any type pertaining
>>to retroactive moderation, including but not limited to,
>>discussion, posting, advocating the use of, creating or
>>distributing software for, and/or using such software or other
>>devices for accomplishing said retroactive moderation.
>
>Yeah, right. This guys skull is like several inches thich.
>He will continue to waste our collective money waving his
>stupid ARMM flag until hell freezes over. There have been several
>chances for him to count the votes against him and he continues to
>think that not enough people have heard his idea or somthing. At
>any rate he continues to post and draw flamage increasing the S/N ratio.
>The only suggestion I can come up with is getting the discussion
>confined to alt.fan.whatever his name is. (As if I can forget it.)
>
>Hey RED! Shut up already!

Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit the national debt.

Dick
--
Richard E. Depew, Munroe Falls, OH r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (home)

``The greatest blessing of our democracy is freedom. But in the last
analysis, our only freedom is the freedom to discipline ourselves.''

-- Bernard Baruch

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 25, 1993, 3:03:56 PM7/25/93
to
b...@rescon.UUCP (Alex Batyi) writes:
>In article <22joct$1...@nwfocus.wa.com> gu...@halcyon.com (Dennis Wicks) writes:
>>I can't believe that this subject is still being debated!
>
>Believe it.
>
>>Therefore I demand that R.E.D.
>>immediatly cease and desist all activity of any type pertaining
>>to retroactive moderation, including but not limited to,
>>discussion, posting, advocating the use of, creating or
>>distributing software for, and/or using such software or other
>>devices for accomplishing said retroactive moderation.
>
>Yeah, right. This guys skull is like several inches thich.
>He will continue to waste our collective money waving his
>stupid ARMM flag until hell freezes over. There have been several
>chances for him to count the votes against him and he continues to
>think that not enough people have heard his idea or somthing. At
>any rate he continues to post and draw flamage increasing the S/N ratio.
>The only suggestion I can come up with is getting the discussion
>confined to alt.fan.whatever his name is. (As if I can forget it.)

You two are suffering from several misconceptions.

First, that isn't my skull... that is the crash helmet that I
have been wearing since the "defenestrate Depew" thread.

Second, you are supposed to turn in your collective money for
capitalist money. The NSF says so.

Third, it is no longer an ARMM flag... it was partially burned
in the ARMM-cascade flame war. All that is left is a tattered banner
that says "RM".

Fourth, the weather forecast from gopher.hell.com calls for
continued hot and dry conditions.

Fifth, votes that are posted to the newsgroup cannot be counted.

Sixth, I have it on good authority that there are *whole*
*countries* that haven't connected to the net yet.

Seventh, my critics don't flame, they express their opinions
strongly.

Eighth, the newgroup message for alt.fan.whatever his name is
seems not to have made it to redpoll.

>Hey RED! Shut up already!

This is a *very* persuasive argument. I'll take it under
consideration.

"Blessed be the young for they shall inherit the national debt."
-- Herbert Hoover

Dick
--
Richard E. Depew, Munroe Falls, OH r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (home)

``The greatest blessing of our democracy is freedom. But in the last
analysis, our only freedom is the freedom to discipline ourselves.''

-- Bernard Baruch

Richard E. Depew

unread,
Jul 26, 1993, 9:02:56 AM7/26/93
to
cac...@clinton.com (L. Todd Masco) writes:
>In article <13...@rescon.UUCP> b...@rescon.UUCP (Alex Batyi) writes:
>>In article <22joct$1...@nwfocus.wa.com> gu...@halcyon.com (Dennis Wicks) writes:
>>>I can't believe that this subject is still being debated!
>>
>>Believe it.
>>
>>>Therefore I demand that R.E.D.
>>>immediatly cease and desist all activity of any type pertaining
>>>to retroactive moderation, including but not limited to,
>>>discussion, posting, advocating the use of, creating or
>>>distributing software for, and/or using such software or other
>>>devices for accomplishing said retroactive moderation.
>>
>>Yeah, right. This guys skull is like several inches thich.
>>He will continue to waste our collective money waving his
>>stupid ARMM flag until hell freezes over. There have been several
>>chances for him to count the votes against him and he continues to
>>think that not enough people have heard his idea or somthing. At
>>any rate he continues to post and draw flamage increasing the S/N ratio.
>>The only suggestion I can come up with is getting the discussion
>>confined to alt.fan.whatever his name is. (As if I can forget it.)
>
>It's important to note that if any of these people were retro-
> moderators, Dick, your posts would have been nuked long ago.

The discussion of newsgroup democracy and retroactive moderation
isn't suitable for all newsgroups, Todd. If a particular newsgroup
were to decide, through a democratic process, that this debate is
unwelcome, and elect a retroactive moderator to make sure it is
ejected, I'd have no problem with that! I'd welcome it! And I'd
take my side of the debate to a newsgroup where it is more welcome.

>Feel better about your proposal now?

I still feel good about it, yes.

Michael L. Kaufman

unread,
Jul 26, 1993, 6:41:40 PM7/26/93
to
r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:
> The discussion of newsgroup democracy and retroactive moderation
>isn't suitable for all newsgroups, Todd. If a particular newsgroup
>were to decide, through a democratic process, that this debate is
>unwelcome, and elect a retroactive moderator to make sure it is
>ejected, I'd have no problem with that!

Or perhaps, someone might unilateraly decide that your posts were inappropiate
to some newsgroups and start up a robo-poster to cancel them, or maybe just
bomb the newgroup with hundreds of posts about how they could have canceled
them. Would you have a problem with that?

Michael

--
Michael Kaufman | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on
kaufman | fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in
@eecs.nwu.edu | the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be
| lost in time - like tears in rain. Time to die. Roy Batty

Cousin It

unread,
Jul 27, 1993, 2:47:16 AM7/27/93
to
r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:
|cac...@clinton.com (L. Todd Masco) writes:

|>It's important to note that if any of these people were retro-
|> moderators, Dick, your posts would have been nuked long ago.

| The discussion of newsgroup democracy and retroactive moderation
|isn't suitable for all newsgroups, Todd. If a particular newsgroup
|were to decide, through a democratic process, that this debate is
|unwelcome, and elect a retroactive moderator to make sure it is
|ejected, I'd have no problem with that! I'd welcome it! And I'd
|take my side of the debate to a newsgroup where it is more welcome.

Begs the point Dick. If these people were the moderator of any
group, your posts are gone. Regardless of "charter." It is something
to think about, especially when people will not come to your rescue.

|>Feel better about your proposal now?

| I still feel good about it, yes.

You are the only one.

Brandon Magee c...@cs.brandeis.edu
"The nation's glued to CNN, to watch their own creation"
-Winger "Blind Revolution Mad"

L. Todd Masco

unread,
Jul 27, 1993, 12:06:15 PM7/27/93
to
[Follow-ups set to news.future. nap is only vaguely appropriate, and
news.future is home of the retromod flamewar. Note that a retro-moderator
is not required to change the venue.]

In article <CArw8...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us> r...@redpoll.mrfs.oh.us (Richard E. Depew) writes:
>cac...@clinton.com (L. Todd Masco) writes:
>>It's important to note that if any of these people were retro-
>> moderators, Dick, your posts would have been nuked long ago.
>
> The discussion of newsgroup democracy and retroactive moderation
>isn't suitable for all newsgroups, Todd. If a particular newsgroup
>were to decide, through a democratic process, that this debate is
>unwelcome, and elect a retroactive moderator to make sure it is
>ejected, I'd have no problem with that! I'd welcome it! And I'd
>take my side of the debate to a newsgroup where it is more welcome.

That is not what would have happened. The newsgroup would not
have voted upon whether or not your article was appropriate or
on charter. The people reading the newsgroup wouldn't have
even known your articles existed. The moderators

Reminds me of a WKRP In Cincinatti episode, long ago. Some preacher
came in with a list of songs that his group had decided were
indecent and should be banned. If 'KRP wouldn't stop playing them,
they'd boycott 'KRP's advertisers. Okay, they said. But, wait,
they continued: what about this song. The preacher read it (it
was "Imagine," by John Lennon) and said "nope, it sounds atheistic.
It's out." "One person made that decision," said Mr. Carlson, and
punted the guy out.

The point is this:

This is why, in our legal system, different people are judge, jury, and
executioner. Retromoderation sets up random people as all three: that's
an inappropriate allocation of power for something that claims to be
based on democratic principles.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages