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.

   NET_DEV      Forum for Fidonet developer questions      342 messages   

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

   Message 279 of 342   
   Oli to Alan Ianson   
   Pssword ord ord case insensitive or not?   
   23 Apr 20 09:57:10   
   
   REPLY: 1:153/757 5ea0b421   
   MSGID: 2:280/464.47@fidonet 5ea14a56   
   PID: GED+LNX 1.1.5-b20180707   
   CHRS: UTF-8 4   
   TZUTC: 0200   
   TID: CrashMail II/Linux 1.7   
   22 Apr 20 14:12, you wrote to me:   
      
    AI> Hello Oli,   
      
    Ol>> But you have to define the filebox for every node in advance. I   
    Ol>> thougt it would be nice to create a filebox for every incoming   
    Ol>> connection automatically. Argus is very flexible (search for   
    Ol>> filebox):   
      
    Ol>> http://www.artur.pl/hack/ritlabs.ii.pl/argus/hlp/eng/index.html   
      
    AI> That's an interesting idea but you'd have to communicate the location   
    AI> of that inbound filebox to your tosser somehow.   
      
   It could be like BSO for inbound. You just need a good specification for the   
   format.   
   E.g. Node 7:8/9 calls and received files are put into   
      
   inbound/othernet.7.8.9.0/trusted/   
      
   or if there is no session password into   
      
   inbound/othernet.7.8.9.0/unknown/   
      
   No need to specifiy an inbox for every node and point in the mailer's config.   
      
    AI>>> What I would like to see is a proper binkps protocol. We could   
    AI>>> drop the CRYPT option (when using binkps) and have a fully   
    AI>>> secure session, regardless of inbound or outbound directories.   
      
    Ol>> I don't understand how this is connected to packet passwords and   
    Ol>> inbound dirs.   
      
    AI> If we had a reliable/secure session we wouldn't need packet passwords   
    AI> or inbound directories randomly placed around the file system.   
      
   I still don't understand how that helps. What exactly do you have in mind?   
      
   The problem is the interface between mailer and tosser. Everyone with a   
   session password can drop anything in my shared "secure" inbound. So now we   
   need a packet password, because the information about the session is thrown   
   out the window and isn't communicated to the tosser. We wouldn't need a packet   
   password, if the tosser did know that the packet was delivered in an   
   authenticated session with node 7:8/9.   
      
      
    * Origin: kakistocracy (2:280/464.47)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 18/200 90/1 103/705 120/340 601 154/10 203/0 221/0   
   SEEN-BY: 226/30 227/114 229/426 1014 240/5832 249/206 317 280/464   
   SEEN-BY: 280/5003 288/100 292/854 8125 310/31 317/3 322/757 342/200   
   SEEN-BY: 396/45 423/120 633/280 712/848 770/1   
   PATH: 280/464 229/426   
      

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


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca