Xref: utzoo news.admin:14558 comp.mail.uucp:6639 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!ucselx!berick!optigfx!sceard!mrm From: mrm@sceard.Sceard.COM (M.R.Murphy) Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: BITFTP Keywords: MBAS abuse Message-ID: <1991May21.143344.27296@sceard.Sceard.COM> Date: 21 May 91 14:33:44 GMT References: <489@frcs.UUCP> <1991May20.182222.16345@iguana.uucp> Reply-To: mrm@Sceard.COM (M.R.Murphy) Organization: The Mole and Badger Association of Northern San Diego County Lines: 28 In article <1991May20.182222.16345@iguana.uucp> merce@iguana.uucp (Jim Mercer) writes: >don't talk like a sysadmin, if you don't know what you are talking about. It would seem that more heat than light is being generated in this discussion. I'll try for light rather than heat. I suggest we look at the problem from a different perspective. Rather than joeuser making an abusive request of an MBAS, look at the problem as an MBAS abuse of the net. The MBAS makes abusive demands on noncooperative downstream sites. A zeroth level solution is for the MBAS to pull the plug. (Hi Princeton:-). A first level solution would be to have the MBAS check the return path for a request for someting like MBASsite!cooperating_site_or_path!requestingsite!joeuser where "cooperating_site_or_path" might be "uunet" or "uunet!reallybigsite". That would be pretty easy. It could use software that already exists (pathalias, smail2.5), and it would be fast. If the path to the requestor is no good, then don't allow the request or only allow small stuff. A site could certainly send an E-mail message to an MBAS saying that it would cooperate. That could be verified by telephone, registered mail, or DNA typing for you Phorgery Phreaks out there :-) It is easier to deal with an offending MBAS than with the vast morass of us joeusers. -- Mike Murphy mrm@Sceard.COM ucsd!sceard!mrm +1 619 598 5874