Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!news.hawaii.edu!ames!agate!stanford.edu!morrow.stanford.edu!pangea.Stanford.EDU!karish
From: karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI & Our Retaliation
Message-ID: <1992Jul29.214714.9919@morrow.stanford.edu>
Sender: news@morrow.stanford.edu (News Service)
Organization: Mindcraft, Inc.
References: <9207231306.AA06854@GRANNY.CS.NYU.EDU> <4442@hq.hq.af.mil> <l7c8pgINN7a1@neuro.usc.edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 21:47:14 GMT
Lines: 40
In article <l7c8pgINN7a1@neuro.usc.edu> merlin@neuro.usc.edu (merlin) writes:
>In article <4442@hq.hq.af.mil# john@hq.af.mil writes:
>#Several Ideas for retaliation.
>#5) while :
># do
># ls /usr/spool/news/junk #/tmp/foo
># for i in `cat /tmp/foo`
># do
># mail postmaster@att.com </usr/spool/news/junk/$i
># done
># sleep 600
># done
I give this scheme about ten minutes between the
time someone at AT&T notices it and the time all the
messages the saboteurs send start getting dumped on the
floor.
The bandwidth this takes would inconvenience
everyone on the Internet, not just AT&T.
>#6) Use the tcp wrapper to exclude all att.com connections to
>#your box. wuarchives, uunet, prep, etc. And generally make the net
>#and unfriendly place for AT&T to do business. Kill their forwarded
>#mail. Stomp their packets on your bridges routers and so forth.
>
>Please don't do either (5) or (6) [the part about killing forwarded
>email] -- in some jurisdictions such actions may be considered to be
>criminal -- in other jurisdictions that just seem simply unfriendly.
(5) could be viewed as a denial-of-service attack.
More likely,the worst outcome would be some finger-wagging
from the perpetrator's INternet service provider.
I doubt that (6) is illegal unless it's done by
a system that has common carrier status.
--
Chuck Karish karish@mindcraft.com
(415) 323-9000 x117 karish@forel.stanford.edu