From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu May 1 23:28:36 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA16246 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 1 May 1997 23:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mixcom.mixcom.com (mixcom.mixcom.com [198.137.186.100]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA16240 for ; Thu, 1 May 1997 23:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mixcom.mixcom.com (8.6.12/2.2) id BAA24727; Fri, 2 May 1997 01:30:42 -0500 Received: from p75.mixcom.com(198.137.186.25) by mixcom.mixcom.com via smap (V1.3) id sma024721; Fri May 2 01:30:28 1997 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970502013027.00b8f104@mixcom.com> X-Sender: sysop@mixcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 01:30:28 -0500 To: John-Mark Gurney From: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" Subject: Re: SPAM target Cc: FreeBSD-Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 09:30 PM 5/1/97 -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote: >what is a BIFF packet anyways? never heard the term... man biff Formatting page, please wait...Done. BIFF(1) FreeBSD General Commands Manual BIFF(1) NAME biff - be notified if mail arrives and who it is from --snip-- You can stop this by commenting out comsat in /etc/inetd.conf (default in 2.2.1) and HUPing inetd. Once had a local system doing this, which was annoying. The port biff uses, 512, should be filtered at the router. >well.. I think we should call the FBI.. it's a national matter as >he has crossed state lines... as he's spamming our "fax machines" >across the country (and world wide)... Some dweeb threatened me with: By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b) (1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment, punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever is greater, for EACH violation. For a customer's news posting?! Right and you read the subject and *still* read the message. FO. Anyone ever hear of a precedence set, except in either Indiana or Iowa, for this? One of the 2 states had a case where this was applied to a mass mailer, but I never got a copy of the news clip for this one. You could call, but unless it was sufficient to cause a "denial of service" you may not have much legal recourse. (OK, I will admit that I've done some digging, but wish I had tangible laws.... or access to military hardware for pinpoint targeting of certain ground targets from a F-114 ;) ------------------------------------------- Jeff Mountin - System/Network Administrator jeff@mixcom.net MIX Communications Serving the Internet since 1990