Subj : Re: Is binkp/d's security model kaputt?
To   : Atreyu
From : JoE DooM
Date : Sun Dec 19 2021 07:45 am

I'm going to chime in on an old thread here and haven't read the
followups yet. :)

 > are and won't change. Then that convo fizzles out. Sysops are just
 > happy
 > trading banter on a flawed/obsolete network because they made it just
 > work.

It could be said that we love BBSs *because* they are flawed/obsolete. :)

Personally, I think that our message networks *not* being accessible via
HTTP and *not* able to be scraped by companies looking to make a profit
from data collection and re-sale is a positive thing. And I'm not just
talking Facebook and Google, but companies like Shodan who scrape the web
looking for vulnerabilities and then sell access to that info.

I know that historically FTNs have sometimes been exported to websites
(which I disagree with) but from what I've seen that's mostly Fidonet,
which nobody cares about any more.

We are specifically making a point to *not* be on the web, and I think
that's why these conversations fizzle out. And if something does
eventuate from it, the BBS world (small as it is) would be divided.
Refer: Fidonet.

Some other things to consider are that several people are running old
systems including 8bit systems, BBSs often have limits of 8 character
passwords and are stored in plain text, and to redo something that has
been worked on for decades by volunteers who are just doing this for fun
not profit is fairly unlikely to gain traction.

I remember years ago, one guy had the grand idea that we should be able
to have a phone app to connect to BBSs. And he wanted people to write the
code for him because he wasn't capable. That didn't get far either. 

My personal feeling is that we should strengthen what we have, not throw
it out to start fresh.



--- Talisman v0.35-dev (Linux/x86_64)
 * Origin: Lost Underground BBS (21:1/230)

.