Alan Ianson wrote to Oli <=-

Not that I know of. I have never run into a case sensitive
tosser, at least not that I know of.

Squish is case-sensitive with packet passwords (it's been a while since I've had to
deal with it) ... at least the OS/2 version.

Later,
Sean

___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Outpost BBS * bbs.outpostbbs.net:10123 (1:18/200)

mark lewis wrote to Oli <=-

at one time, fidonet has had some folks that like to ""play games""...

Hah, I remember that. Wasn't that what NOBOGUS was supposed to deal with?

binkd supports inbound fileboxes... i'm not sure about tossers,
though...

I know that T-Mail and Internet Rex support fileboxes.

I've never heard of a tosser supporting fileboxes because you wouldn't be putting mail packets into a filebox.

Later,
Sean

___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Outpost BBS * bbs.outpostbbs.net:10123 (1:18/200)

Alan Ianson wrote to Oli <=-

If we had a reliable/secure session we wouldn't need packet passwords
or inbound directories randomly placed around the file system.

That's what a session password is for.

Later,
Sean

___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Outpost BBS * bbs.outpostbbs.net:10123 (1:18/200)

Re: Pssword ord ord case ins
By: Sean Dennis to mark lewis on Sat Apr 25 2020 06:56 pm

mark lewis wrote to Oli <=-

at one time, fidonet has had some folks that like to ""play games""...

Hah, I remember that. Wasn't that what NOBOGUS was supposed to deal with?

binkd supports inbound fileboxes... i'm not sure about tossers, though...

I know that T-Mail and Internet Rex support fileboxes.

I've never heard of a tosser supporting fileboxes because you wouldn't be putting mail packets into a filebox.

SBBSecho supports both inboxes and outboxes, and yes, you can put packets and bundles into fileboxes.

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #33:
The Synchronet web user interface was contributed by Robert Couture, Runemaster.
Norco, CA WX: 87.2øF, 31.0% humidity, 13 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Hi Rob,

SBBSecho supports both inboxes and outboxes, and yes,
you can put packets and bundles into fileboxes.

I guess I could see that if you're not running a FEM. I've always used a BSO so the directories are easy to fake even if you're not using a FEM, like I am with Internet Rex. I do have BinkleyTerm set up and ready to use though.

That's the first I've heard of with a tosser supporting those functions. I guess I'm just falling behind. :D

Later,
Sean


--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Outpost BBS * bbs.outpostbbs.net:10123 (1:18/200)

Hello Sean,

If we had a reliable/secure session we wouldn't need packet
passwords or inbound directories randomly placed around the file
system.

That's what a session password is for.

I was talking about binkps over TLS. In that case we wouldn't need a session password either since we are relying on the TLS handshake.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Re: Pssword ord ord case ins
By: Alan Ianson to Sean Dennis on Sat Apr 25 2020 10:38 pm

Hello Sean,

If we had a reliable/secure session we wouldn't need packet
passwords or inbound directories randomly placed around the file
system.

That's what a session password is for.

I was talking about binkps over TLS. In that case we wouldn't need a session password either since we are relying on the TLS handshake.

The way were using TLS with BINKPS, it provides privacy (secrecy), but not authentication. We still rely on the session passwords for authentication.

digital man

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #25:
DTE = Data Terminal Equipment
Norco, CA WX: 71.3øF, 51.0% humidity, 0 mph SSW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

Hello Rob,

I was talking about binkps over TLS. In that case we wouldn't need
a session password either since we are relying on the TLS
handshake.

The way were using TLS with BINKPS, it provides privacy (secrecy), but
not authentication. We still rely on the session passwords for authentication.

Oops, I forgot about that. OK, we'll keep the session/packet paswords. :)

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Re: Pssword ord ord case ins
By: Sean Dennis to mark lewis on Sat Apr 25 2020 18:56:28

at one time, fidonet has had some folks that like to ""play games""...

Hah, I remember that. Wasn't that what NOBOGUS was supposed to deal with?

it was one of the programs created to deal with them, yes...

binkd supports inbound fileboxes... i'm not sure about tossers,
though...

I know that T-Mail and Internet Rex support fileboxes.

yep...

I've never heard of a tosser supporting fileboxes because you wouldn't
be putting mail packets into a filebox.

why not? consider a node or point that resides on the same LAN as a hub... why not put the files/bundles/packets in shared filebox directories instead of using mailers over the LAN? the end result is the same, of course ;)


)\/(ark
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: SouthEast Star Mail HUB - SESTAR (1:3634/12)

Re: Pssword ord ord case ins
By: Alan Ianson to Sean Dennis on Sat Apr 25 2020 22:38:14

If we had a reliable/secure session we wouldn't need packet
passwords or inbound directories randomly placed around the file
system.

That's what a session password is for.

I was talking about binkps over TLS. In that case we wouldn't need
a session password either since we are relying on the TLS handshake.

are two condoms better than one?

with the speed of today's systems, the additional processing and/or the decision to use or not the session password is negligible... the additional space required is equally negligible, as well...


)\/(ark
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: SouthEast Star Mail HUB - SESTAR (1:3634/12)

Hello mark,

I was talking about binkps over TLS. In that case we wouldn't
need a session password either since we are relying on the TLS
handshake.

are two condoms better than one?

In the case of TLS we get a secure session but that could be anyone so we still
need a session password or some mechanism to authenticate so mail from non password protected sessions is placed in the non secure inbound.

I was wrong when I said the above.

with the speed of today's systems, the additional processing and/or
the decision to use or not the session password is negligible... the additional space required is equally negligible, as well...

That is true but a proper binkps protocol (if there ever is one) would best be designed simply to do what we need it to do in an efficient way.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)