-=> Quoting Bob Lawrence to John Tserkezis <=-

Hello Bob,

 JT> It STILL would be tracable to your node. Firstly it would take
 JT> you to your host node, and then the host sysop would look at
 JT> the packets as they come into his system. They look at who
 JT> actually delivered "those" packets, and bingo, they've got you.

 BL> How would he know who delivered them if you'd doctored the path and
 BL> got in on someone else's password?
 
 You wouldn't.  This is why we have passwords in the first place, to stop that
sort of thing happening.

 JT> This isn't like the internet where you fake a message and send
 JT> it into the wild blue yonder for all to marval at your geniuse
 JT> hacking skills. 

 BL> We sent a "Rod Speed" message one night in ten minutes of hacking.

 Sure, and it would be amost impossible to track if you weren't expecting it.
If I were exepecting something like that, I would be looking at every incoming
packet from everyone, and looking for 'rod speed' messages from anyone other
than rod himself.  THEN I know, otherwise I should be able to track back old
packets, my system should keep them for a while, it'll just cause much trouble
for me to actually look back on logs.
 
 JT> It would still only stop wankers inc. Once they actually
 JT> question the node that it *seems* to be coming from, they would
 JT> of course claim ignorance, and then they would look further
 JT> into it. It depends on how cluey the sysop is though

 BL> Most wouldn't even know. I'm not talking about illegal paths, just
 BL> misleading ones.

 Sure, my mailer doesn't use the message itself for checking, but the message
*.PKT bundle.  That bundle has a to and from header, as well as a password,
which all get checked, the message contents are passed on as per normal.

John Tserkezis, Sydney, Oz. Fidonet: 3:712/610  Internet: jt{at}suburbia.com.au

... ZONE3_SYSOP  The funnest place in the whole wide world!
---