Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

5313Re: [BPQ32] Re: unholding held msgs

Expand Messages
  • James Wagner
    Feb 3, 2011
    • 0 Attachment

      John -

      I agree that it is not perfect, but a node is as critical piece of the puzzle as the bbs. One bent on causing mayhem could mess with the node. compromising access to the bbs, no? So, if it is good enough for node protection, it ought to be good enough for the rareish cases when it is really needed.

      Personally,  I would offer the capability with a caution that the security is not perfect and a recommendation to use a long string and to change it occasionally if you do have to use it. 

      In years past, I had to remote sysop a bbs that only had rf access. It was on a hilltop that was snowed in part of the year and far enough away that site visits were inconvenient. I recall setting up something that could be used for a remote computer reboot in order to deal with perceptions of OS stability issues. It was inconvenient, but that was the way it was, and the inconvenience was smaller than the inconvenience of having to site visit for bbs management.

      Jim Wagner, 
      KA7EHK 

      From: John Wiseman <john.wiseman@...>
      To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thu, February 3, 2011 11:35:33 AM
      Subject: RE: [BPQ32] Re: unholding held msgs

       

      This is the system used for remote sysop access to the BPQ32 node.
       
      Maybe I'm a bit parnoid, but I'm not convinced it is secure enough to sysop a BBS. And I'm not convinced that the Windows platform is really reliable enough to run a remote BBS. However, I'll look into adding unhold to the command line sysop facilites, and some form of remote sysop authentication. The system used for remote authentication of rig control commands is pretty secure, but requires the two machine clocks to be syncronised, which isn't easy without an internet link.
       
      73,
      John
       
       
       
       -----Original Message-----
      From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Brabham
      Sent: 03 February 2011 18:37
      To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [BPQ32] Re: unholding held msgs

       

      In the past, I have used the system secribed by KA7EHK extensively. It works very well, and you can of course update the password string from time to time for added security. A password string 256 characters long that you match six or seven random characters at a time over the air would be pretty difficult to hack. - I never had a security problem, and at one time remote-SYSOP'ed two BBS stations in addition to a FlexNet node.
       
      The remote node SYSOP setup was easy... The node computer had a copy of BBS software in it that acted as a file server, and remote reset switch. It was not used as a BBS, I only used the remote SYSOP tools to maintain another bit of software in the same machine.
       
      It's a sort of standard, I can think of three packet programs which use that system, off-hand. There are more, especially if you count the xNOS variants seperately.
       
      73 DE Charles, N5PVL
       
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Jerry
      Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 10:42 AM
      Subject: RE: [BPQ32] Re: unholding held msgs

       

      I believe he said internet was not an option at this location… 73 Jerry

      From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of WS7I
      Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 10:58 AM
      To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [BPQ32] Re: unholding held msgs

       

      Why not just use a program like TeamViewer and remotely log into the computer and operate as normal?  Couple of us use this all the time.  You can put Ham Radio Deluxe and even control the radio.

      Jay

      On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:23 AM, Jeff - WA4ZKO <wa4zko@...> wrote:

       

      Best I can tell "unholding" messages and the hold flag on new uers has to be done on the local BBS console. I think T-type messages are the only messages that can be status manipulated on RF....beyond the usual K #, KM and etc.

      I think some of reasoning behind this is for security concerns. Anyone could forge a sysop call into their TNC, log in on RF and do damage. If the message was held due to inappropriate content, then you don't want to accidentally be reading it over RF.

      Guess in your case this sucks ;-) Maybe John can do some form of sysop password that uses a challenge/response type system (does no good to send the password over the air).

      I'd also like the ability to manipulate rig control while on remote. Most of the time I do my BBS work while on MSRDP or LogMeIn remote sessions, but there are times where telnet is more practical for me.

      73
      Jeff
      WA4ZKO
      "Packet Radio never died, it just evolved."
      Packet: WA4ZKO@WA4ZKO.#NKY.KY.USA.NOAM
      http://twitter.com/wa4zko

      --- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com, "w8ehh" <w8ehh1@...> wrote:
      >
      > Good Evening All
      >
      > I asked this once before but got no answer.
      > Is there away to unhold messages remotely? Or do I have to go to the site to do sysop work.
      > If that is the case, John do you think that you can add remote sysoping by RF. I thought that it could be done in FBB.
      >
      > Since this site is at a remote location I will need to make changes from time to time and don't want to have to got to the site every time. At present we do not have internet access, so all has to be done by RF if I can.
      >
      > Thanks
      >
      > Mike W8EHH
      >


    • Show all 14 messages in this topic