On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 10:48:38 PDT, Mark Kent said:
However, I think it was too subtle... I didn't get it, and I think chris@uu.net and Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu also didn't get it. I don't think they would have posted messages saying the same thing as your hidden meaning.
Hmm.. and here I *thought* I got it... or did I? On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 11:38:29 PDT, Mark Kent said:
OK, so there is my point. Back in those days the network security folks would often find themselves in the same lunch line as the "ISP" security folks. And they were available by phone with just a four digit extension.
In the 1980's, finding the four digit extension, the exchange it was in, and the area code to use could be *quite* interesting if you were *NOT* one of the anointed people in the lunch line. Cliff Stoll didn't have any easy time finding people in 1987. Further, consider the two attached messages, which Dave Mills apparently posted because he couldn't find phone numbers or email addresses for the culprits(*). Then consider the weekly "can a security guy with a clue from XYZnet please call me?" postings, and ask if we *have* learned anything.... /Valdis (*) OK - I admit it. One of the offending boxes was one of mine - it was a Gould PN/9808, and at 12MIPS it noticed a few packets/sec a lot less than a Fuzzball did. That, and at the time I was busy moving to a new job and not paying as close attention. It got fixed as soon as I saw the postings...