From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat May 31 09:50:47 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA28902
          for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 31 May 1997 09:50:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dg-rtp.dg.com (dg-rtp.rtp.dg.com [128.222.1.2])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA28888
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat, 31 May 1997 09:50:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by dg-rtp.dg.com (5.4R3.10/dg-rtp-v02)
	id AA01500; Sat, 31 May 1997 12:50:06 -0400
Received: from ponds by dg-rtp.dg.com.rtp.dg.com; Sat, 31 May 1997 12:50 EDT
Received: from lakes.water.net (lakes [10.0.0.3]) by ponds.water.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA27087; Sat, 31 May 1997 07:17:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.water.net (8.8.5/8.6.9) id HAA15341; Sat, 31 May 1997 07:24:46 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 07:24:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com>
Message-Id: <199705311124.HAA15341@lakes.water.net>
To: dgy@rtd.com, ponds!Mole.ORG!mrm
Subject: Re: uucp uid's
Cc: ponds!rtd.com!dgy, ponds!FreeBSD.ORG!hackers,
        ponds!uriah.heep.sax.de!joerg_wunsch
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> > > If each UUCP dialup account has a unique login and that is compromised, you
> > > can tell exactly where the problem originated, can disable that *single*
> > > account (vs. *all* of them) without affecting service to other accounts
> > > and can go in search of how the problem originated in the first place.
> > 
> > Each UUCP dialup account can have a unique login without having a unique
> > UID :-) That's not to say I don't think a unique UID is good, just that
> > it can be done. I _do_ think unique UID's are a good thing.
> 
> Yes, I currently have nuucp and xuucp sharing a uid.  However, I
> had intended to indicate unique *uids* in the above statement.
> As in uhost1:900:...  uhost2:901:...  etc.
> 
> > > UUCP itself is a dinosaur.  Yet, I see several places that use UUCP as 
> > > their sole connection to the electronic world.  Kinda tough to force
> > > a client/customer to do things *your* way when *he's* paying the bills!  :>
> > 
> > UUCP was a good dinosaur. It still has advantages in this highly
> > interconnected world. I especially liked the multiple connectivity
> > fishnet rather than the cluster connected net we now have.
> 
> Yes.  And a good deal of the population doesn't have direct IP
> connectivity, etc.
> 
> --don
> 

 Yes - I'd have to agree - since UUCP is my primary connection to
the-rest-of-the-world.

 By the way, I've had as many as 16 UUCP neighbors.  In recent years,
this has dwindled to about 3 or 4.

 I gave each a separate account (so they could each have their own
passwd and UID.) e.g.:
	Uxxxxx  for machine 'xxxxx'
	Uyyyyy  for machine 'yyyyy'
	Uzzzzz  for machine 'zzzzz'

but they have the same home directory.  One advantage of this is that,
at any given time, I can see who is dialed in and decide if I want
to kick them off to use the modem myself :-) (just use who.)

	- Dave Rivers -