Path: utzoo!attcan!lsuc!ncrcan!brian
From: brian@ncrcan.Toronto.NCR.COM (Brian Onn)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: problems with att multiple-machine approach?
Message-ID: <950@ncrcan.Toronto.NCR.COM>
Date: 5 Oct 88 14:19:53 GMT
References: <1988Sep23.105347.652@lsuc.uucp> <2300@att.ATT.COM> <1988Sep29.210829.29073@lsuc.uucp> <1988Oct3.115720.2175@ateng.ateng.com>
Reply-To: brian@ncrcan.Toronto.NCR.COM (Brian Onn)
Organization: NCR Canada Ltd., Mississauga, Ontario
Lines: 26

In article <1988Oct3.115720.2175@ateng.ateng.com> chip@ateng.ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>According to dave@lsuc.uucp (David Sherman):
>>Uh, yeah.  Not to get snarky or anything, but many years ago
>>someone came up with this wonderful idea called a PASSWORD.
>>Just give each machine its own login.
>
>...which solves nothing.  If I (ateng) have a UUCP login on att, then I
>can change my nodename to uunet and then use the 'ateng' login.  Presto,
>I've logged in successfully and picked up uunet's mail.
>
>This does leave tracks in the log files; but the damage is done by the time
>it's discovered.

But what about HDB UUCP?  The LOGNAME and VALIDATE fields of the Permissions
file can prevent some login from using another node name.

I would hope that the att sites are using HDB, since it would sure
make an awful large /usr/spool/uucp directory if they weren't.  Not to
mention the almost unmanagability of it.

Brian.
-- 
 +-------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+
 | Brian Onn         | UUCP:..!{uunet!mnetor, watmath!utai}!lsuc!ncrcan!brian |
 | NCR Canada Ltd.   | INTERNET: Brian.Onn@Toronto.NCR.COM                    |
 +-------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+