From owner-freebsd-security  Thu Jul 31 08:24:55 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA15087
          for security-outgoing; Thu, 31 Jul 1997 08:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grendel.IAEhv.nl (grendel.IAEhv.nl [194.151.72.15])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA15051
          for <security@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 31 Jul 1997 08:24:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from peter@localhost)
	by grendel.IAEhv.nl (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA00810;
	Thu, 31 Jul 1997 01:43:54 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <19970731014354.30839@grendel.IAEhv.nl>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 01:43:54 +0200
From: Peter Korsten <peter@grendel.IAEhv.nl>
To: security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Keep UUCP (Was: Re: security hole in FreeBSD)
References: <3.0.32.19970730223202.0070ef8c@student.anu.edu.au> <Pine.BSF.3.96.970730143953.969A-100000@acp.qiv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.67e
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970730143953.969A-100000@acp.qiv.com>; from Jay D. Nelson on Wed, Jul 30, 1997 at 03:52:38PM -0500
Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Jay D. Nelson shared with us:
> Sometimes I think we can be too "internet-centric" for our own
> good. UUCP makes good security and economic sense. 
> 
> [lotsa points deleted]
> 
> Make it an install option if you want, but leave it as a part of the
> standard distribution. 

I can only agree with this. As long as queued SMTP isn't commonly
used, keep UUCP. (And then there's the News thing, too.)

I have a rather complicated mail setup, with filters that delete,
refuse, save in a folder or resend mail to my UUCP node according
to a set of rules. To do it without UUCP would be inconvenient,
to put it mildly.

For a non-connected host, who wants to use standard mailers like
Mutt or Elm, there's no real alternative.

- Peter