Xref: utzoo news.admin:4064 comp.mail.uucp:2332
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!honey
From: honey@mailrus.cc.umich.edu (peter honeyman)
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: How safe is UUCP? (Was: Virus in the future?)
Message-ID: <809@mailrus.cc.umich.edu>
Date: 24 Nov 88 04:03:10 GMT
References: <1970@van-bc.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@mailrus.cc.umich.edu
Reply-To: honey@citi.umich.edu (peter honeyman)
Organization: Center for Information Technology Integration, Univ of Michigan
Lines: 16

Stuart Lynne writes:
>HDB is rumoured to have problems but is probably orders of magnitude safer
>than the older versions.

honey danber doesn't have any problems that i know of, notwithstanding
the little ditty i posted last week, but that exploited a bug that was
fixed in svr3.1, i.e., many years ago.  (which is not to say that there
are no sites running the buggy stuff, but it's easily fixed, and
vendors are (now) fully aware of the problem.  furthermore, my posting
was incredibly buggy itself -- and i was severely chastised by norman
wilson for posting "typical code produced by uucp hackers and mailer
science experts: fill of bugs, written apparently without deep
undestanding of the tools, and gratuitously complicated."  touche',
norman, and i might add "poorly tested.")

	peter