🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul23.144712.547@ulowell.ulowell.edu> oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:
>Has anyone else heard of this system? I'm getting tons of FTP connections
>from it.
>
>The domain "pleasure.com" does not actually exist. The IP address used is
>192.160.196.5, which is mapped to "pleasure.com". The IP address actually
>belong to InteleCom Data Systems (NET-NET-IDS-COM).
>
>Isn't mapping to a false name against the rules?
>
>This site appears to a BBS for erotica gifs and such, which may violate some
>of the regulations of some networks. Apparently a user can have that system
>ftp files to their own account, which is why I see the FTP connections. 
>however I am concerned about the methods used to do this, as it may require
>the divluging of the users password.
>

  Is this system located in Rhode Island? If so I know the system personally, 
as I am an occasional users of it although I am not a memeber so I can not use
the FTp and other Net gizmo's they have connect (and I don't need it esp. for 
$50 a year). Well is this is the same system, as far as I know there are no
erotic gifs on it, unless it's in some private section. It started out as a
muilti-dialin BBS running on a VAX (sick huh ;-) then they recently got a 
19,200 BPS I-Net connection via one of those commercial companies. They carry
RIME (Relay-Net Internation Message Exchange) conferences which is sort of a
PC BBS UUCP style network around the world.  I dunno if this is the same place
but they do have the same names. Oh well oh it does not require divulging
passwords because the SYSADMIN there is the one who takes the FTP requests.










----
I hope our stupid inews likes the amount of "new" text this time.

oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:
: Has anyone else heard of this system? I'm getting tons of FTP connections
: from it.
: 
: The domain "pleasure.com" does not actually exist. The IP address used is
: 192.160.196.5, which is mapped to "pleasure.com". The IP address actually
: belong to InteleCom Data Systems (NET-NET-IDS-COM).
Oddly I can't resolve the name at all.
Both attempting a forward mapping of pleasure.com
and a reverse mapping of 192.160.196.5.
What nameserver are you using?
(I am trying with a root of ns.nic.ddn.mil)
ids.net resloves to 155.212.1.2 and 192.67.241.11
The later fails a reverse mapping.
ids.com
gives an MX record to idsvax.ids.risc.net, which resolves to 155.212.1.2
the same as ids.net, but not an alias
: 
: Isn't mapping to a false name against the rules?
: 
: This site appears to a BBS for erotica gifs and such, which may violate some
: of the regulations of some networks. Apparently a user can have that system
: ftp files to their own account, which is why I see the FTP connections. 
: however I am concerned about the methods used to do this, as it may require
: the divluging of the users password.
I have seen this method used on other BBS's personally I don't like it,
as it involves entering a password for another system to get it to work.
BBS downloading should be done by connecting to an FTP server on the 
BBS machine, loging into the BBS, then running an FTP client to connect to
your machine is the WRONG way to do it.
Also it dosn't work with packages like NCSA telnet, which use a one time
password system, entered at the time the server prompts you.
Taking all the parameters, then firing up an ftp process is braindead!
Also connections in to a machine, from unexpected places tend to alarm
sys-admins.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans                                   |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 565 1979 (Home)                     |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)             |

From article <1992Jul23.144712.547@ulowell.ulowell.edu>, by oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill):
> Has anyone else heard of this system? I'm getting tons of FTP connections
> from it.
> 
> The domain "pleasure.com" does not actually exist. The IP address used is
> 192.160.196.5, which is mapped to "pleasure.com". The IP address actually
> belong to InteleCom Data Systems (NET-NET-IDS-COM).
> 
> Isn't mapping to a false name against the rules?


nslookup on 192.160.196.5 tells me this is host  "pleasure.com", _and_
that authoritative answers can be found at  idsvax.ids.risc.net (155.212.1.2).

The "whois" database at nic.ddn.mil tells me that

  o risc.net is Rhode Island Internet Systems

  o idsvax.ids.risc.net is one of their nameservers

  o the _domain_ pleasure.com does not exist (or at least is not 
    registered with the NIC)


nslookup, using idsvax.ids.risc.net as the nameserver, tells me such
(typ=any, class=in):

pleasure.com   origin = pleasure.com
	mail addr = sysadmin.pleasure.com
	serial=1, refresh=7200, retry=7200, expire=12096000, min=86400
pleasure.com    nameserver = pleasure.com

Other info requests come up empty.

*Still*...  there _are_ vestiges of "pleasure.com" in nameserver(s), even
if a lookup of the name "pleasure.com" fails to resolve to an address.

Now, to the point.  What are the "rules" on domain names?  Aren't they
supposed to be registered, perhaps with _the_ NIC?   If risc.net acts
as a "local" registration agency, is it required to pass the domain
info "up the line"?  And what happens here is some other organization
_does_ attempt to register with nic.ddn.mil's HOSTMASTER?  Won't _some_
people get confusing/conflicting nameserver responses?

I'm probably just _very_ confused on this issue (which is why I'm asking),
but it all seems a little "off" to me.   Anyone care to "unconfuse" me?

-- 
John G Dobnick                          ATTnet: (414) 229-5727
Computing Services Division             INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee     UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd

"Knowing how things work is the basis for appreciation,
and is thus a source of civilized delight."  -- William Safire

In article <64189@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt5870c@prism.gatech.EDU (Noah White) writes:
)In article <1992Jul23.144712.547@ulowell.ulowell.edu> oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:
)>
)>This site appears to a BBS for erotica gifs and such, which may violate some
)>of the regulations of some networks. Apparently a user can have that system
)>ftp files to their own account, which is why I see the FTP connections. 
)>however I am concerned about the methods used to do this, as it may require
)>the divluging of the users password.
)>
)
)Oh well oh it does not require divulging
)passwords because the SYSADMIN there is the one who takes the FTP requests.

Wait a minute...if I log in to pleasure.com and ask the sysadmin to put a
file in my account here, how is he going to get into my account here without
divulging my password?  Or am I misunderstanding what's happening?

)----
)I hope our stupid inews likes the amount of "new" text this time.

(Try replacing the >'s at the beginning of the line with something else, say
}'s or )'s....)
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan Coopersmith			Internet: alanc@ocf.berkeley.edu
University of California, Berkeley	Bitnet:   alanc@UCBOCF.BITNET

oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:

>Has anyone else heard of this system? I'm getting tons of FTP connections
>from it.

>The domain "pleasure.com" does not actually exist. The IP address used is
>192.160.196.5, which is mapped to "pleasure.com". The IP address actually
>belong to InteleCom Data Systems (NET-NET-IDS-COM).

>This site appears to a BBS for erotica gifs and such, which may violate some
>of the regulations of some networks. Apparently a user can have that system
>ftp files to their own account, which is why I see the FTP connections. 
>however I am concerned about the methods used to do this, as it may require
>the divluging of the users password.

Yes, it's a commercial BBS that is only connectable through the
'business' nets.  That is, if I go through my employer's PSI
connection, I can telnet to it.  If I go through UIUC's NFSNET
connection, I cannot.  So, there is some router somewhere that isn't
allowing NSFNET traffic to their network.  I'm surprised that it
allows traffic the other way!

I wonder if they're just setting up and collecting passwords...
-- 
David Lemson                                                 (217) 244-1205
University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant  / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin
Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu                 UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson 
NeXTMail accepted                                   BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD

In <64189@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt5870c@prism.gatech.EDU (Noah White) writes:

>In article <1992Jul23.144712.547@ulowell.ulowell.edu> oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:
>>Apparently a user can have that system
>>ftp files to their own account, which is why I see the FTP connections. 
>>however I am concerned about the methods used to do this, as it may require
>>the divluging of the users password.

>Oh well oh it does not require divulging
>passwords because the SYSADMIN there is the one who takes the FTP requests.

So?  If you wanted this sysadmin to ftp to your account you would still have
to give them your password.


Janet Jackson
<janet@cs.uwa.edu.au>
Systems Administrator
Department of Computer Science
The University of Western Australia

lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Lemson) writes:


>Yes, it's a commercial BBS that is only connectable through the
>'business' nets.  That is, if I go through my employer's PSI
>connection, I can telnet to it.  If I go through UIUC's NFSNET
>connection, I cannot.  So, there is some router somewhere that isn't
>allowing NSFNET traffic to their network.  I'm surprised that it
>allows traffic the other way!

More likely your route to it through NSFNET follows defaults until
you get to the NSFNET which says "network unreachable" (NSF routers
are no-default routers and know every net you may use them to reach).

Darren

lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Lemson) writes:

>I wonder if they're just setting up and collecting passwords...

Is this type of bullshit really necessary? I don't question your motives
with using the net, I don't think you have any right to project a negative
opinion on another system you have no knowledge of.

MD
-- 
--  Dr. Michael P. Deignan (deg.pend.)      /   "Its okay dear,
--  Domain: kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net     /     you can show me...
--    UUCP: ..!uunet!anomaly!kd1hz        /      I'm a Doctor..."

In article <14qpc7INNore@agate.berkeley.edu> alanc@ocf.berkeley.edu (Alan Coopersmith) writes:
>In article <64189@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt5870c@prism.gatech.EDU (Noah White) writes:
>)In article <1992Jul23.144712.547@ulowell.ulowell.edu> oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:
>
>Wait a minute...if I log in to pleasure.com and ask the sysadmin to put a
>file in my account here, how is he going to get into my account here without
>divulging my password?  Or am I misunderstanding what's happening?
>
  If the sysadmin is running Unix, a simple chown, chgrp make it yours, 
remember the super user can go anywhere and do anything without others 
passwords.








-----
.sig

In article <janet.712298382@dunnart> janet@cs.uwa.oz.au (Janet Jackson) writes:
>In <64189@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt5870c@prism.gatech.EDU (Noah White) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Jul23.144712.547@ulowell.ulowell.edu> oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:
>
>So?  If you wanted this sysadmin to ftp to your account you would still have
>to give them your password.

   No, you are missing the point, the users give joe sysadmin an FTP request
which is probably batched by the sysadmin (similar to a firewall concept)
the requests are carried out and the files are given the proper ownerships
and placed in the proper user accounts on the system (at least that is how
I read it). Remember joe superuser can do anything to anyone's account
without their password.





----

In article <64629@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gt5870c@prism.gatech.EDU (Noah White) writes:
> >Wait a minute...if I log in to pleasure.com and ask the sysadmin to put a
> >file in my account here, how is he going to get into my account here without
> >divulging my password?  Or am I misunderstanding what's happening?
>
>   If the sysadmin is running Unix, a simple chown, chgrp make it yours, 
> remember the super user can go anywhere and do anything without others 
> passwords.

You've missed the point. If you ask the sysadmin of System X to put a file
on your account on system Y, either sysadmin of X must have your password
on System Y, or must have sysadmin type permissions on Y. 

gt5870c@prism.gatech.EDU (Noah White) writes:

|In article <14qpc7INNore@agate.berkeley.edu> alanc@ocf.berkeley.edu (Alan Coopersmith) writes:
|>In article <64189@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt5870c@prism.gatech.EDU (Noah White) writes:
|>)In article <1992Jul23.144712.547@ulowell.ulowell.edu> oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:
|>
|>Wait a minute...if I log in to pleasure.com and ask the sysadmin to put a
|>file in my account here, how is he going to get into my account here without
|>divulging my password?  Or am I misunderstanding what's happening?
|>
|  If the sysadmin is running Unix, a simple chown, chgrp make it yours, 
|remember the super user can go anywhere and do anything without others 
|passwords.

On *HIS* host maybe, but how is supposed to do it on anybody elses machine
without a password?

--
Richard Begg (richard@asis.unimelb.edu.au)
Admin Systems and Info Services - University of Melbourne.