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