From owner-freebsd-security  Fri Sep  8 08:43:34 1995
Return-Path: security-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id IAA12667
          for security-outgoing; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 08:43:34 -0700
Received: from precipice.shockwave.com (precipice.shockwave.com [171.69.108.33])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id IAA12661
          for <security@freebsd.org>; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 08:43:32 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by precipice.shockwave.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA02968; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 08:38:10 -0700
Message-Id: <199509081538.IAA02968@precipice.shockwave.com>
To: piero@strider.ibenet.it
cc: stesin@elvisti.kiev.ua (Andrew V. Stesin), wollman@lcs.mit.edu,
        security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Do we *really* need logger(1)? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 08 Sep 1995 12:26:37 +0200."
             <199509081026.MAA22658@strider.ibenet.it> 
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 1995 08:38:10 -0700
From: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com>
Sender: security-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

  Comments?
  
no, no, No, NO.....NO!!!!!!!!!

Don't duplicate effort with half-assed schemes that make local assumptions.

Don't confuse authentication with authorization.

There are already kerberos patches available for syslogd to do the
right thing.