🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.admin.policy
Article #89

Re: Policy regarding Crack

#89
From: Christopher Davis
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 23:29
43 lines
2905 bytes
Wes> == Wes Morgan <morgan@ms.uky.edu> 

First, I think we're in violent agreement, just talking past each other
a bit.  My main point was that preventing Crack use on your systems
doesn't stop the Evil Ones from taking your file elsewhere (not
something I think you'd argue against ;-) and that to protect *your*
systems, the only real method is to protect your passwords through
proactive (npasswd, etc), reactive (Crack), and preventative (shadow)
methods.

 Wes> Why, then, should our assistance be restricted to reactive
 Wes> functions?  If I can take steps to prevent potential problems
 Wes> WITHOUT affecting my core mission (Engineering education, in my
 Wes> case), why *shouldn't* I do so?

No reason at all.

 Wes> I believe that I, as a sysadmin, have a certain obligation to the
 Wes> other systems using our common network(s).  Why should I allow my
 Wes> system to be used as a 'forward base' from which to attack other
 Wes> systems?  Should I adopt an attitude such as "well, he's not
 Wes> cracking MY password file, so I don't care"?  If I found someone
 Wes> attempting to crack the password file for kragar.eff.org, wouldn't
 Wes> you want me to notify you?  If so, why shouldn't I prevent it in
 Wes> the first place, if such a goal is (relatively) attaniable?

I agree that preventing this behavior is important, just that it's not
sufficient.  One of the rules on our systems is that using them to
attack other systems is prohibited, and certainly I'd notify you if I
found someone cracking your password file, as much as I'd like you to
notify me if someone were cracking one of mine.

Again, however, if they take it off to their quiet corner of the
computing world to crack it, neither of us will ever know, so it
behooves us to take advantage of various protective methods...

(Hopefully this thread will give some of the novice system
administrators you referred to in the sections I deleted a chance to
learn more about what they can do to protect their machines.)
--
Christopher Davis * ckd@eff.org * System Administrator, EFF * +1 617 864 0665
            ``Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ti Kwan Leep.
            Approach me that you might see.'' -- The Master
Technical Details
Message-ID: <CKD.92Aug27192908@loiosh.eff.org>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!eff!ckd
References: <1992Aug26.170825.29391@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1992Aug26.174017.1077@ms.uky.edu> <CKD.92Aug26221743@loiosh.eff.org> <1992Aug27.115813.28741@ms.uky.edu>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!eff!ckd
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: Policy regarding Crack
In-Reply-To: morgan@ms.uky.edu's message of 27 Aug 92 15:58:13 GMT
Message-ID: <CKD.92Aug27192908@loiosh.eff.org>
Sender: usenet@eff.org (NNTP News Poster)
Nntp-Posting-Host: loiosh.eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
References: <1992Aug26.170825.29391@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1992Aug26.174017.1077@ms.uky.edu>
 <CKD.92Aug26221743@loiosh.eff.org> <1992Aug27.115813.28741@ms.uky.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 23:29:10 GMT
Lines: 43