home bbs files messages ]

Just a sample of the Echomail archive

Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.

   BINKD      Support for the Internet BinKD mailer      8,958 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 6,864 of 8,958   
   Michiel van der Vlist to mark lewis   
   -64 and -46 option missing in 101   
   02 May 20 10:29:04   
   
   TID: FMail-W32 2.1.3.7-B20170919   
   TZUTC: 0200   
   CHRS: UTF-8 4   
   PID: GED+W32 1.1.5-b20170303   
   MSGID: 2:280/5555 5ead2f50   
   REPLY: 721.fido-binkd@1:3634/12 2311c22d   
   Hello mark,   
      
   On Friday May 01 2020 16:41, you wrote to me:   
      
    MvdV>> Binkd does nothing with the packets. As you once said it is "just a   
    MvdV>> filer". It is other software, such as a tosser that deals with the   
    MvdV>> packets. There is nothing stopping sysops from having the binkd   
    MvdV>> session password different from the tosser's packet password.   
      
    ml> on the one hand, this is true... if one is talking about binkd...   
      
   This is the binkd area. The word "binkd "appears twice in my above comment.   
   The source of this subthread is Benny P. miouwing about an alleged "clear text   
   password problem" in binkd. Of course I am talking about binkd.   
      
    ml> my part of the discussion was leaning more toward binkp, though...   
      
   You neglected to inform the audience about that change of context...   
      
   Plus that I see no mention of an 8 characer limitation on the password in the   
   binkp docs...   
      
    ml> i'm not saying that it is correct for mailers to validate packets   
    ml> against the session password... i'm just saying that there are/were   
    ml> some that do/did...   
      
   Irrelevant what some others do/did. We are not discussing those others, we are   
   discussing session passwords in binkd.   
      
    MvdV>> In fact some say NOT having them the same increases security.   
      
    ml> yeah, i've heard that, too ;)   
      
   I agree with "some". A 24 byte non ASCII case sensitive password is harder to   
   brute force than an 8 character case insensitive ASCII password. ==> increasd   
   security.   
      
      
   Cheers, Michiel   
      
   --- Fmail, Binkd, Golded   
    * Origin: http://www.vlist.eu (2:280/5555)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 90/1 120/340 601 220/50 226/30 227/114 229/100 101   
   SEEN-BY: 229/200 426 664 1014 240/5832 249/109 307 317 292/854 342/200   
   PATH: 280/5555 464 229/101 426   
      

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca