Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 22:33:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Dmitry Kohmanyuk <dk@dog.farm.org> To: peter@grendel.IAEhv.nl (Peter Korsten) Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Keep UUCP (Was: Re: security hole in FreeBSD) Message-ID: <199708020533.WAA14747@dog.farm.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <19970731014354.30839@grendel.IAEhv.nl> you wrote: > 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.) also, why you folks think uucp is only for e-mail? it's also a nice remote batch executition environment. (works over TCP, too.) Consider: uux 'host1!prog -flags' 'host2!file1' 'host3!file2' (I actually use it this way.) > For a non-connected host, who wants to use standard mailers like > Mutt or Elm, there's no real alternative. I have set up a network in university to use uucp backup for mail with dial-out when leased line came down on weekends... It still works. -- "The number of Unix installations has grown to 10, with more expected" - The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June, 1972
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708020533.WAA14747>