|
Lists *CAN* Get You Listed!, Legion of Doom (Austi
NOTICE: TO ALL CONCERNED Certain text files and messages contained on this site deal with activities and devices which would be in violation of various Federal, State, and local laws if actually carried out or constructed. The webmasters of this site do not advocate the breaking of any law. Our text files and message bases are for informational purposes only. We recommend that you contact your local law enforcement officials before undertaking any project based upon any information obtained from this or any other web site. We do not guarantee that any of the information contained on this system is correct, workable, or factual. We are not responsible for, nor do we assume any liability for, damages resulting from the use of any information on this site.
****************************************************************************
>C O M P U T E R U N D E R G R O U N D<
>D I G E S T<
*** Volume 1, Issue #1.06 (April 27, 1990) **
****************************************************************************
MODERATORS: Jim Thomas / Gordon Meyer
REPLY TO: [email protected]
COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
diverse views.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent the
views of the moderators. Contributors assume all responsibility
for assuring that articles submitted do not violate copyright
protections.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In This Issue:
File 1: Moderators' Corner (news and notes)
File 2: Lists *CAN* Get You Listed!
File 3: Legion of Doom (Austin / Chicago) Update (27 April)
File 4: Review of THE CUCKOO'S EGG
File 5: SMTP Hints
--------------------------------------------------------------------
***************************************************************
*** Computer Underground Digest Issue #1.06 / File 1 of 5 ***
***************************************************************
In this file:
-- Call for Articles
-- More Crackdowns?
-- LoD Rumors
--------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
Call for Articles
------------
It's the busy time of the term, but we're hoping people will send more
articles on various topics. In this issue we review Clifford Stoll's THE
CUCKOO'S EGG, and we'd like to get some pro or con responses on the book,
as well as publish a few more articles on it from various perspectives.
In a previous issue of C-u-D, a typo slipped by: THERE ARE ONLY THREE
issues of LoD Technical Journal. The fourth was in progress. Most of those
files were destroyed, but if anybody received any advance drafts or has any
of those files laying around, please send them. They would be a nifty
addition to the archives, and we're hoping that issue is not lost forever.
SO--send those articles in!
-------------------
More Crackdowns?
-------------------
The computer underground isn't the only target of enforcement or
legislative crackdowns. The CHICAGO TRIBUNE (April 20) reports two more
"crimes" that can result either in heavy penalties or in confiscation of
possessions.
In Illinois, a law is being considered that would make it a felony to give
*ANY* minor a drink of alcohol. On the suface, this seems a reasonable law,
but it also outlaws parents allowing their 20-year old offspring a sip of
wine under their supervision in the privacy of their home or a sip of wine
at private religious ceremony at home. The penalty is THREE YEARS IN PRISON
AND A FINE OF UP TO $10,000! (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, April 20, p. II-1).
In Wisconsin, "the governor signed a law authorizing authorities to seize
and sell cars used in prostitution crimes, a measure aimed at increasing
the pressure on customers" (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, April 20, p. I-3).
Laws originally used to fight drugs and racketeering are being expanded to
criminalize and punish in ways not originally intended. We seem to be
living in a time when special interest groups (and not so special interest
groups) are attempting to criminalize all those behaviors to which they
object and impose potentially cruel and unusual punishments, or at least
extreme punishments. It's hard to be sympathetic toward a drug pusher, so
when harsh laws were passed, few objected. But, now those laws are being
expanded and the confiscation of personal property seems to be in vogue.
Isn't it time to "JUST SAY NO!?"
---------------
LoD Rumors
---------------
Some of the most outlandish rumors have come to us about the LoD events. We
have heard that some are in jail, some have been indicted for treason, that
Mentor was awoken with a shotgun at his head...the list goes on. We have
reprinted the events as they occured in previous issues, and will keep
subscribers up to date. The sources for our information include
participants on both sides of the case, and despite the predictable slants
each side may have, the facts are consistent, so we consider the
information accurate. So, c'mon--tell others to quit spreading rumors!
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
+ END THIS FILE +
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
***************************************************************
*** Computer Underground Digest Issue #1.06 / File 2 of 5 ***
***************************************************************
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 90 19:31:22 PDT
From: "S.S.D.D." <brewer@@portal.com>
To: tk0jut2%[email protected]
Subject: RE: CuD #1.01
Regarding Marks' comments about being on a mailing list triggering
harassing action, I have experience showing it happens.
Back in about 1970, in my misspent youth, I subscribed to a little-known
newsletter called "The Tel Line". This was a phreak magazine that was
published in Southern Cal somewhere, and was a precursor to most of the
P/hack digests that exist today. Included was the normal blue box/ loop
line generalized phreaking stuff that was very active at the time. (BTW:
2600 magazine had a short article on this magazine back in 88 or so).
...anyway, I remember getting an issue in which the editorial talked about
the publishers getting heat from Bell Tel, and being asked to turn over
their subscription list to the "authorities". I never received another
issue, but shortly after that, I (and my parents!!!) began receiving
threatening phone calls and letters from Pac Bell, claiming I was involved
in red box activity. Knowing what I know now, I should have told those
"authorities" where to pack it, but at 14 or so, I was a bit nervous!
Anyway at that time I had had no other contacts with the phreak world, and
my experience was limited to dialing 100's of 800 numbers and dialing thru
local exchanges looking for test numbers, ringbacks etc. This local
experimentation was in the Mountain Bell region and had nothing to do with
either red boxes or Pac Bell. Anyway, it was obvious that the phone cops
had gotten hold of the mailing list.
Since this happened back in the neolithic era (pre-PC's! And my parents
only bought rotary service... sore fingers!!_) I'm sure that the state of
the art of intelligence gathering by "the authorities" has advanced quite
a bit, and I am sure that there are a few corporate security subscribers
out there taking names.
Hell if I care! Give 'em 1000's of names! Keep 'em busy! But be aware that
"Big Brother" does indeed listen!
/john
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
+ END THIS FILE +
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
***************************************************************
*** Computer Underground Digest Issue #1.06 / File 3 of 5 ***
***************************************************************
** STOP HACKING! IT'S NOT WORTH THE TROUBLE. FIND ANOTHER HOBBY! **"
(The Mentor)
On March 1, the Secret Service and other law enforcement officers in
Austin, Texas, raided the home of The Mentor and the offices of Steve
Jackson Games searching for evidence related to computer hacking. As of
this writing (April 25), there have been no indictments brought against any
of the Austin group alleged by federal law enforcement officials to be
participants in the Legion of Doom. According to one inside source, "we are
just floating in limbo." Another close source indicated that none of the
equipment confiscated from The Mentor or Erik Bloodaxe has been returned.
Equipment confiscated from Steve Jackson games, producer of fantasy
role-playing adventure games, has also not been returned. One source
inside SJG indicated that a few files have been returned, but that they had
lost all value or utility by the time they were returned. An accurate and
balanced NEWSWEEK story ("The Hacker Dragnet," by John Schwartz, April 20,
1990: p. 50) indicated that:
Jackson had to push back his deadlines for producing other
games, cut back on his plans for new releases and lay off
half of his staff. He puts the out-of-pocket losses at
$25,000 and owes about $75,000 more.
One of those who had over $5,000 worth of equipment removed indicated that
he was losing over $1,000 a week in lost income by not being able to work
at home. Also confiscated were the graduate papers of his wife (stored on
the hard drive) and other files related to education.
There are unconfirmed rumors that federal officials have indicated action
will be taken within a month, but that this action could range from an
indictment to the return of the equipment with an apology.
At least two others in the Austin area had their equipment confiscated in
raids. A week earlier, one person who was "just in the wrong place at the
wrong time" lost over $30,000 worth of computer hardware, and another had
his equipment confiscated.
As for Knight Lightning's case in Chicago, A motion is pending in Federal
Court.. The gov't has asked for a continuance. No developments are
expected until mid to late May. If anything happens we'll let folks know,
if rumours are floating around let us know so we can confirm/deny them.
The docket number for the case is:
90-CR-0070
One of the counts in the federal charges filed by William Cook, Assistant
United States Attorney William J. Cook contends that E911 material was
stolen and published in PHRACK which could have been used to disrupt
emergency services (see Schwartz's NEWSWEEK article and the indictment in
Cu-D #1.00). We have read and re-read the E911 material published in
PHRACK, and there is virtually nothing in it that reveals any sensitive
information of any kind about the E911 or any other system. The published
material is little more than definitions of terms, and is, by any
reasonable standard, totally worthless as a "how to" document. We have been
advised not to circulate the material for legal reasons, but if and when we
are advised that it is legally permissible, we will re-print it so others
can make an independent judgment.
We recommend John Schwartz's NEWSWEEK article. He nicely identifies the
danger of the current witch hunt for hackers, especially the LoD. As those
familiar with the computer underground know, the LoD is hardly a monolithic
fraternity of terrorists or "high tech street gangs," as Bill Cook once
called hackers. They were a loose group of people on communication with one
another largely for the purpose of sharing information. Contrary to media
and law enforcement reports, our own independent evidence from LoD members
or from alleged targets of their activities indicates that there was no
organized group effort to terrorize, extort, or to engage in any of the
felonious activities to which their critics allude. It is our professional
judgment that the name has been symbolized for enforcement purposes, and
those associated with that name are being targeted regardless of whether
evidence exists of their wrong doing.
We agree with sysop Al Evans (quoted in NEWSWEEK, April 30: p. 50):
Given a choice between hackers and police crackdowns,
%Al Evans% knows which he prefers: "The threat of somebody
knocking on my door at 5:30 in the morning is the one that
makes ME worry."
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
+ END THIS FILE +
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
***************************************************************
*** Computer Underground Digest Issue #1.06 / File 4 of 5 ***
***************************************************************
Review of:
THE CUCKOO'S EGG: TRACKING A SPY THROUGH THE MAZE OF COMPUTER ESPIONAGE.
by Clifford Stoll. New York: Doubleday; 326 pp.
Reviewed by Jim Thomas, Northern Illinois University
23 April, 1990
Ah, shucks, Clifford Stoll is just a regular guy, like, ya know? He likes
the Grateful Dead, eats bagels, tries to get out of work, doesn't like the
FBI, cheers the monsters in GODZILLA VERSUS MONSTER ZERO, and, gee, wants
his friends to think he's politically correct. His tennies even squish
when they're wet. Just "good ol' Cliff," a self-styled former hippy with
long hair who apparently doesn't know that Hippy died before he could
possibly have been one. But, no matter. Cliff just wants to re-assure us
that he's not such a bad guy.
But, Clifford Stoll grew up. He says so. Chasing those nasty hackers via
modem and a slew of computers made him see the error of his ways. Those
nasty perpetrators (he prefers "varmint," "eggsucker," "skunk," "louse,"
"bastard," and he's oh, so clever in translating bureaucratic-speak into
Cliffspeak (p. 256-257)).
THE CUCKOO'S EGG is a book of ironies: An amoral moralist produces a
diatribe against hackers that is perhaps the best hacking primer for
novices around. Although taking swipes against law enforcement agents at
every opportunity, Stoll nonetheless assumes the role of Kafka's Joseph K. in
acquiescing to those he seems to loath. In protecting the public by
tracking down an alleged spy, he subverts the public trust by distorting
his topic and inexcusably glossing over the complexity of issues. He is a
scientist by profession while ignoring the factual precision of his craft
in his writing.
For all the posturing and moralizing, Stoll produced a compelling mystery
of sorts. A hacker has broken into the University of California/Berkeley's
system, and only a minor error gave him away. Stoll notices the error and
alerts his superiors who begrudgingly allow him to track down the culprit.
Any computer undergrounder can identify with and appreciate Stoll's
obsession and patience in attempting to trace the hacker through a maze of
international gateways and computer systems. But, Stoll apparently misses
the obvious affinity he has with those he condemns. He simply dismisses
hackers as "monsters" and displays virtually no recognition of the
similarities between his own activity and those of the computer
underground. This is what makes Stoll's work so dangerous: His work is an
unreflective exercise in self-promotion, a tome that divides the sacred
world of technocrats from the profane activities of those who would
challenge it; Stoll stigmatizes without understanding.
Stoll's work is irresponsible because his image of the world reminds us of
a simpler time, one where everything sprang from either the forces of light
or of darkness. Hackers are bad: They trash things, are immature, should
be punished, and threaten the foundations of hi-tech civilization as we
know it. Stoll, on the other hand, is good: He hates hackers, single
handedly saved civilization from the modem-macho demons, and fought the
good fight as any true he-man would. God help the hacker when Clifford
Stoll gets angry: "It was him against me now. For real" (p. 106).
Stoll's disdain for hackers' alleged violations of privacy hardly stood in
the way of his own activities, but, for a good obsession, one that's "for
real," what can a few violations of his own hurt? God forbid that hackers
monitor others' communications. Stoll, however, suffered only the briefest
of qualms when he himself monitors them. But, his "sweetheart Martha," a
law student, absolved him of any ethical violations:
"'Look,' she mumbled, burning the roof of her mouth on the
vulcanized mozzarella. 'You're not the government, so you don't
need a search warrant. THE WORST IT WOULD BE IS AN INVASION OF
PRIVACY %emphasis added%. And people dialing up a computer
PROBABLY HAVE NO RIGHT TO INSIST THAT THE SYSTEM'S OWNER NOT LOOK
OVER THEIR SHOULDER %emphasis added%. So I don't see why you
can't.'
So with a clear conscience, I started building a monitoring
system" (p. 20).
Why be bothered that he neither is the owner of the system nor, according
to his continual complaining, possesses the authorization to monitor from
his superiors. He has been self-absolved and can proceed with a clear
conscience, and proceed he does--with a vengeance.
Stoll "borrows," without authorization, "thirty or forty monitors" by
"liberating personal computers from secretaries' desks." No big deal.
"THERE'D BE HELL TO PAY ON MONDAY, BUT IT'S EASIER TO GIVE AN APOLOGY THAN
GET PERMISSION" (p. 22, emphasis added).
How does Stoll's excitement for learning about phone traces (p. 30) differ
from the typical hacker's? How do his own efforts in phone traces differ
from a phreak's? Like any good p/hacker, he enlists allies to feed him
information, and then uses that information. The difference is that Stoll
is on a mission. For Real. And what are a few indiscretions to a man on a
mission?
"I worried about how the hacker might abuse our network
connections over the weekend. Rather than camping out in the
computer room, I pulled the plugs to all the networks. To
cover my tracks, I posted a greeting for every user logging
in: 'Due to building construction, all networks are down
until Monday.' It wold surely isolate the hacker from the
Milnet. By counting complaints, I could take a census of
how many people relied on this network.
Quite a few, it turned out. Enough to get me into trouble."
Complaints led to a request for Stoll to look into the "problem."
"It took five minutes to patch the network through. The boss
thought I'd done magic. I kept my mouth shut" (p. 88).
Stoll's depiction of hackers as emerging from the slime of some primordial
ethical muck for engaging in behaviors that he himself relishes is
bothersome. It is this immoralism that makes the work so dangerous. Stoll
has found a way to play the hacking game without suffering the risks to
which hackers are subject. Some might call this cowardly. To assure that
the reader understands the difference between "white deviance" and "black
deviance," he goes to great pains to establish considerable distance
between himself and those he criticizes in a ploy similar to historical
witch hunts. Witch hunts begin when the targets are labelled as "other,"
as something quite different from normal people. In Stoll's view, hackers,
like witches, are creatures not quite like the rest of us, and his
repetitious use of such pejorative terms as "rats," "monsters," "vandals,"
and "bastard" transforms the hacker into something less than human. This
transformation contributes to the hysteria of the media, legislators, and
law enforcement agents who use such observations to justify the purge of
the sacred temples from this techno-menace. After all, says Stoll, hackers
aren't just bright kids:
"They're technically skilled but ethically bankrupt programmers
without any respect for others' work--or privacy. They're not
destroying one or two programs. They're trying to wreck the
cooperation that builds our networks" (p. 159).
Stoll would never wreck "a wonderful playground for everybody else by
putting razor blades in the sand," and analogy he uses to describe hackers
in a recent NEWSWEEK article ("The Hacker Dragnet," NEWSWEEK, April 30,
1990: p. 50). Or, if he did, he would just apologize on Monday morning!
In a classic example of a degradation ritual, Stoll--through assertion and
hyperbole rather than reasoned argument--has redefined the moral status of
hackers into something menacing. The imagery he presents is not of normal
people engaging in occasionally questionable activities, but of a demonic
force intent on destroying the fabric of computer networks. His logic
implies a pathological syllogism:
a) Cancer is a disease and must be eradicated
b) Hackers are a cancer of the techno-body
c) THERFORE: Hackers must be eradicated.
Such unchallenged logic has led to the flurry of anti-computer abuse laws,
confiscation of equipment, a chilling effect on speech on BBSs,
media fright stories, and to a public perception of hackers that
seems--judging from existing data--quite unjustified. Stoll's lack of
reflection on the SOCIAL MEANING and significance of the computer
underground and his identification of ALL hacking activity with those of
the dramatic and quite rare example of an alleged spy both distorts the
nature of all computer underground activity and grossly over-estimates its
danger. I call this dangerous because it is demagoguery of the worst sort:
Under the guise of a story-telling narrative, it creates an imagery of a
target population for control, but allows little room for debating the
assertions and values that justify scapegoating on the other. Consider
just a few of many examples.
First, Stoll claims that hackers are a menace because they "trash"
programs. True, some hackers may trash programs, just as some drivers use
automobiles in bank robberies. But, Stoll ignores a primary tenet of the hacker
ethic, which is "though shalt not trash!" The image presented in THE
CUCKOO'S EGG ignores this, which obscures the respect that hackers
generally have for the work of others.
Second, Stoll believes hackers are a danger to computerized information
processing:
Information in databases? They've %hackers% no qualms, if they
can figure out how to get it. Suppose it's a list of AIDS
patients? Or your last year's income tax return? Or my credit
history? (p 287).
Even if hackers are able to obtain such information, they are scarcely the
threat that Stoll claims. Hackers are not interested in credit histories,
but in mastering computer technology. Yes, some individuals may illegally
obtain such information, but these are not the breed of hackers about whom
Stoll writes. Further, the danger of misuse of personal information hardly
comes from hackers, but from those who claim authorized access to it and
use it for profit.
Third, Stoll compares hacking into computers with house invasion. Such a
comparison is dramatic but unconvincing. Even if we were to concede the
impropriety of accessing a university or corporate computer, which most
hackers target, this is hardly the same as forcibly entering one's home. A
better analogy might be to compare hacking with the person across the
street who focuses binoculars through the bedroom window of a copulating
couple, or, at worst, an independent entrepreneur who sets up an
unauthorized lemonade stand on the corner of a private yard. But, even if
I were to concede that hacking is akin to forcible entry, which I do not,
should it be criminalized? In England, trespass is a civil, not a criminal,
wrong, and it is up to the party to bring civil charges. Unfortunately,
computer technology is changing faster than the law is able to keep up with
it, and rather than seek new ways to deal with new problems, Stoll's logic
implies the simple continuation of the "law-'n-order" mentality.
Finally, Stoll believes that hackers destroy the community of computerists,
and "if that trust is broken, the community will vanish forever" (p. 288).
Dramatic? Yes. True? No. This threat to some imaginary commonweal would
seem a critical indictment if accurate, but most computer users do not
share a sense of community, or, if they do, some convincing data would be
helpful. Stoll's presumed empiricist bent when analyzing problems in his
own field of astronomy does not seen to carry over to his social commentary.
But, perhaps men on a mission need not worry about facts. In fact, being
unencumbered by data, Stoll the scientist seems particularly unrestrained
in his comments.
Stoll's work is disingenuous for several reasons. At the intellectual level,
it provides a persuasive, but simplistic, moral imagery of the nature of
right and wrong, and provides what--to a lay reader--would seem a
compelling justification for more statutes and severe penalties against the
computer underground. This is troublesome for two reasons. First, it leads
to a mentality of social control by law enforcement during a social phase
when some would argue we are already over-controlled. Second, it invokes a
punishment model that assumes we can stamp out behaviors to which we object
if only we apprehend and convict a sufficient number of violators. We
already have existing laws sufficient to prosecute those who destroy
private property, trespass, defraud, spy, or engage in many of those
activities by which Stoll stigmatizes hackers. We do not need more. In
addition, there is little evidence that punishment will in the long run
reduce any given offense, and the research of Gordon Meyer and I suggests
that criminalization may, in fact, contribute to the growth of the computer
underground.
The computer underground is a complex group comprised of many different
activities. One need not approve of these activities to recognize that, in
some ways, they constitute a resistance to the strains produced by an
increasingly centralized and inaccessible technology. Although I hesitate
to carry the analogy too far, participants in the computer underground can
at least in part be understood as a form of social resistance to the rapid
domination of technological knowledge production and the new forms of
control and social arrangements that it creates. Whether one agrees with
this this specific judgment or not, it is quite obvious that the computer
underground is a phenomenon far more complicated and rich than described in
THE CUCKOO'S EGG.
I have found that, when writing about hackers, there is always the inane
question: "Do you approve of hacking? Why do you defend them?" This, it
seems, strikes at the heart of the problem with Stoll's book: It is, at
root, a self-serving and ideological diatribe that condemns but provides no
understanding. To provide a balanced account of the computer underground
in 1990 is akin to what Stoll might have experienced if he studied
astronomy in seventeenth century Italy: Some issues are so beclouded by
public hysteria whipped up by obscurantists with a stake in promoting
ignorance that any account counter to the National Party Line is heretical.
Perhaps this is why Stoll took the easy path consistent with the dominant
law enforcement and media view. Or, perhaps Stoll really believes his
new-found maturity has transformed him from a pseudo-hippy into a model
citizen:
Omigod! Listening to myself talk like this, I realize that
I've become a grown up (sob!)--a person who REALLY HAS A STAKE
%original emphasis%. My graduate student mentality of earlier
days let me think of the world as just a research project: to be
studied, data extracted, patterns noted. Suddenly there are
conclusions to be drawn; conclusions that carry moral weight.
I guess I've come of age. (p 322).
One suspects that, had Stoll lived in the time of Galileo, he would have
told that troublesome astronomer to quit acting like a child and grow up.
The acknowledgments in the book list Stoll's e-mail address as:
[email protected]
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
+ END THIS FILE +
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
***************************************************************
*** Computer Underground Digest Issue #1.06 / File 5 of 5 ***
***************************************************************
Computer and system literacy improves our ability to send and receive
information across systems and to identity and resolve problems on our own
systems when they occur. We encourage people to submit "tricks and traps"
that others might find useful in their jobs or in simply becoming more
functionally adept on their system.
The following description of SMTP was submitted by The Parrot.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 90 00:43:25 -0400
From: (anonymity requested)
To: TK0JUT2%[email protected]
Subject: SMTP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
A quick SMTP tutorial.
SMTP or simple mail transfer protocol is the method used by most internet
hosts to handle the transfer of mail across the internet. It is a wonderfully
simple system that handles everything in the easiest method possible. All
commands and text are transfered as text, so SMTP is easy to debug. The SMTP
port, which is listed in the services file in the etc directory, can be
connected to using known protocols such as tcp/ip. For debugging purposes, it
can be connected to using telnet. (eg. telnet host #of_smtp_port)
The commands are all text, and are listed, on request, by the SMTP server on the
remote machine. The main ones are: %comments are in curly braces%
Mail From: [email protected] %regular internet address%
RCPT To: [email protected]
Data %to start typing text%
%body of message here... for format see RFC #822%
%from the RFC INDEX... %
%822 Crocker, D. Standard for the format of ARPA Internet text messages.
% 1982 August 13; 47 p. (Format: TXT=109200 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 733;
% or look at an old mail message%
. %finish message with a period%
quit %to quit from connection%
Send mail is not intended as a user interface and should not be used as one.
One of the many mailers available (Elm, bin mail, mm, etc.) all offer an easy
interface between the user and SMTP.
Later.
The Parrot
00
)
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
+ END THIS FILE +
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
!
|
|
