From owner-freebsd-security  Wed Sep  6 20:53:25 1995
Return-Path: security-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id UAA07058
          for security-outgoing; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 20:53:25 -0700
Received: from precipice.shockwave.com (precipice.shockwave.com [171.69.108.33])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA07052
          for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 20:53:23 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by precipice.shockwave.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA00744; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 20:52:10 -0700
Message-Id: <199509070352.UAA00744@precipice.shockwave.com>
To: Brian Tao <taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw>
cc: Bill Trost <trost@cloud.rain.com>, freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Do we *really* need logger(1)? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 07 Sep 1995 08:44:50 +0800."
             <Pine.SOL.3.91.950907083820.22792E-100000@gate> 
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 1995 20:52:10 -0700
From: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com>
Sender: security-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

Because one machine typically serves as a central logging repository for
a number of machines.

  From: Brian Tao <taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw>
  Subject: Re: Do we *really* need logger(1)? 
  On Wed, 6 Sep 1995, Bill Trost wrote:
  > 
  > Logger requires no special permissions to run; anyone can run such a
  > program.  Better yet, anyone could run such a program anywhere on the
  > Internet, so syslogd(8) can also be used as a remote disk-filling
  > service.  (And, since it's UDP-based, you can't tcp-wrap it...).
  
      syslog() and syslogd are the real problems.  What use is there for a
  syslog service on port 514?  I don't see why it should even bother listening
  to a network port.  It should only accept input from /dev/[k]log. 
  --
  Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao
  taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org