Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!hd6 From: HD6@PSUVMA.BITNET Newsgroups: news.admin,news.sysadmin Subject: Re: Net userid forgery Message-ID: <25894HD6@PSUVMA> Date: Mon, 23-Nov-87 17:09:40 EST Article-I.D.: PSUVMA.25894HD6 Posted: Mon Nov 23 17:09:40 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 26-Nov-87 23:21:12 EST References: <1574@bsu-cs.UUCP> Organization: The Pennsylvania State University - Computation Center Lines: 36 Xref: mnetor news.admin:1424 news.sysadmin:492 In article <1574@bsu-cs.UUCP>, dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi) says: >I don't think this particular case is a serious problem. I saw some >fake articles with Rhonda Scribner's name on them, but it was obvious >that they originated elsewhere, because they all had a Sender: field >with a different user id. In fact the ability to add an arbitrary >From: field is useful because it allows a guest user to post under his >or her own name. >-- >Rahul Dhesi UUCP: !{iuvax,pur-ee,uunet}!bsu-cs!dhesi ------------------------------------------------------------------------- In reference to comments made about the earlier article: Unfortunately, we do not have a "Sender:" line displayed on the software running on the PSU machines, only From:, Subject: and Date:. Using this system, there is no way to distinguish falsified from genuine net postings for the casual user. If there had been an obvious way to distinguish between the two, I wouldn't have posted the diatribe that I did. For machines running different software, it would be significantly more difficult to post a forged article, but the problem remains one of net users *trying* and possibly succ- eeding in creating false postings, representing themselves as other, estab- lished users. If you read the original set of articles that spurred my posting (from alt.flames), you will find that the person/s involved contacted a system administrator in an unsuccessful attempt to obtain access to the account they later attempted to forge. The sysadmin did not allow access, so the person/s involved had to use a less plausible means of forgery. The fact that on some systems this forgery was discernable does not change the intent involved, and that is why I posted the article originally. CELADHAEARN ----------- Richard Hoffman *Email replies to hd6@psuvm.bitnet, ^ psuvm.bitnet!hd6, etc., please. ^