Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!gvlf3.gvl.unisys.com!tredysvr!cellar!toad From: toad@cellar.UUCP (Tony Shepps) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: stealing passwords is easy! Message-ID: Date: 4 Jun 91 18:16:35 GMT References: <1991Jun03.071209.2319@vpnet.chi.il.us> Sender: root@cellar.UUCP (Superuser) Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system Lines: 41 louisg@vpnet.chi.il.us (Louis Giliberto) writes: > However, there still are many good BBS's that don't validate users, don't hav > u/d quotas, etc. These primarily work since they are basically monitored by > the users themselves. If someone breaks "protocol", the other users usually > bash him before the sysop needs to take action. After repeated bashings, the > loser usually goes away. This follows a serious "given" that a lot of BBS sysops have forgotten. For electronic communities that are primarily message-oriented, it's the USERS who ultimately define the systems, not the sysops. A sysop can go a long way to provide a good atmosphere for discussion, to provide quality BBS software, and to help the users whenever possible. But the bottom line remains: if quality callers continue to use the system, the system will prosper. Our message-oriented, multi-line system has been running for a mere eight months, but we have had little to no trouble with crackers and/or abusers. I wonder why? We don't voice validate; and we don't have a strict set of rules. But maybe that's partly why the crackers don't come after us in droves. To them, we appear reasonable. We allow handles and we don't hit new users with a list of DON'Ts on their opening call. I like to think we've gotten the user base we like merely by using proper grammar, offering goodies and quality software, and a dose of intellect in our opening screens. We are friendly, open, and intellectual, and so are our users. Coincidence? > If you really think about it, USENET is much this way. Exactly; and count Prodigy as an example of a system with a lot of rules, with a sysop (i.e. management) that doesn't understand that it's the users who ultimately define the system. I'm not disagreeing with Pat's original statements, and I'd guess that the probability of successfully operating a more open system is dependent on the nature of the electronic communities in the area, just as it would be foolish to run something on the honor system in the streets of NYC. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Tony Shepps toad@cellar.UUCP (...uunet!cellar!toad) Not a problem. - - The Cellar BBS +1 215 336 9503 Reliable hardware, responsible sysops, - - and lin# noise is nev~r a prob{{{[3~[3~[3~[3~[3~[3~[3~ NO CARRIER