From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Mar 25 16:50:09 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id QAA22614 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:50:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from cabal.io.org (cabal.io.org [198.133.36.103]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA22577 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:49:55 -0800 (PST) Received: (from taob@localhost) by cabal.io.org (8.7.4/8.7.4) id TAA14782; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:47:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:47:33 -0500 (EST) From: Brian Tao To: FREEBSD-HACKERS-L Subject: Restricting ping -s and -l Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Are there any good reasons why a non-root user should need the -s and -l options in ping? I've had problems in the past with users starting up a dozen "ping -s 8000"'s to a foreign site, saturating our own T1 to the net. Who needs ping -f when you can control the packet size. :( I can't really think of any legitimate reason for allowing -s and -l to unprivileged user, but before I modify the source, I figured I'd ask around first. :) -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob@io.org) System and Network Administrator, Internex Online Inc. "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"