I've been rewatching the original BBS documentary - especially part 2 about FidoNet, Ken Kaplan and the others who helped build FidoNet and beyond... after all the fire posts and shitstorms.I too have often enjoyed re-watching episode 4 of 8 of the BBS documentary covering Fidonet on youtube.
While I carried FidoNet on my BBS in 1993, I wasn't around for the end.End? The story continues.
I too have often enjoyed re-watching episode 4 of 8 of the BBS
documentary covering Fidonet on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ng0NE4lDP2U&t=983s
Have you checked out the 'new' 8-part BBS documentary 'Back to the BBS'? Hyjinx, of Al's Geek Lab BBS/Youtube Channel, recorded a really nice 'current day' BBS doc.
https://youtu.be/n0OwGSX2IiQ?si=8zKb5KYqbSBF4OlG
Thank You for this, I will check it out.I too have often enjoyed re-watching episode 4 of 8 of the BBS documentary covering Fidonet on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ng0NE4lDP2U&t=983s
Have you checked out the 'new' 8-part BBS documentary 'Back to the BBS'? Hyjinx, of Al's Geek Lab BBS/Youtube Channel, recorded a really nice 'current day' BBS doc.
https://youtu.be/n0OwGSX2IiQ?si=8zKb5KYqbSBF4OlG
Its really good.
I've been rewatching the original BBS documentary - especially part 2 about FidoNet, Ken Kaplan and the others who helped build FidoNet and beyond... after all the fire posts and shitstorms.
While I carried FidoNet on my BBS in 1993, I wasn't around for the end. I remember carrying some other nets linked to Telegard and Renegade BBS softwares - when did the Fido protocol get ported or started to be used
by other nets?
It was before that, but I also pulled the plug about the time that sysops started getting arrested for crap that users left on their BBSes.
They were the pioneers, caught up in a w0rld of shit. The man wanted to crac on piracy, hacking, phreaking and anything they didn't understand. Sure ther was tons of bad stuff going on - but the vast majority was technology moving faster than the man knew how to understand.
That crackdown still happens today, at least in Canada. ISP's have it in their AUP's that one is not permitted to have any files of a hacking/phreaking nature hosted on their infrastructure. Doesn't matter
if all those files from the 80's/90's are obsolete/completely useless nowadays.
That crackdown still happens today, at least in Canada. ISP's have it i their AUP's that one is not permitted to have any files of a hacking/phreaking nature hosted on their infrastructure. Doesn't matter if all those files from the 80's/90's are obsolete/completely useless nowadays.
Like CURRENT DAY hacking/phreaking infoz/files, or even 40 year old data/inf that aren't even a thing in modern tech???
Had Spinnaker running flawlessly where it looked better than SBBS's web stuff.
Had Spinnaker running flawlessly where it looked better than SBBS's web stuff.
Screenshots or it didn't happen. :-)
How about using a Virtual server and have that stuff hosted in the usa?
On 04 Dec 24 22:33:55, Digital Man said the following to Atreyu:
Had Spinnaker running flawlessly where it looked better than SBBS's web stuff.
Screenshots or it didn't happen. :-)
Ha! Rob peels off the mask, reveals himself to be Jas Hud. ;)
Administration of Borland Paradox and Spinnaker tables: https://www.darkrealms.ca/spinweb1.png
Generating Spinnaker databases from Renegade and D'Bridge: https://www.darkrealms.ca/spinweb2.png
Simple home page:
https://www.darkrealms.ca/spinweb3.png
Simple message demo:
https://www.darkrealms.ca/spinweb4.png https://www.darkrealms.ca/spinweb5.png
You get the idea.
Cool. I don't see anything there that looks "better than SBBS's web
stuff" (e.g. web.synchro.net), but beauty is in the eye of the
beholder. --
Cool. I don't see anything there that looks "better than SBBS's web stuff" (e.g. web.synchro.net), but beauty is in the eye of the
beholder. --
I read sbbs to be searchlight bbs in this instance.
Oh, that didn't occur to me. I'm kind of used to "SBBS" sometimes (very rarely now) referring to SuperBBS, but I'd never seen Searchlight
referred to as "SBBS". If that's the case, my bad. :-)
All of that stopped when I carefully reviewed my ISP's AUP regarding
what is a grey area of offensive content or things that could be
construed as illegal or problematic from their perspective. Goodies I
have here like the complete archive of alt.suicide.holiday or the many alt.flame.[insert ethnicity] groups for example. You *cannot* host these things on the web on a Canadian ISP.
All of that stopped when I carefully reviewed my ISP's AUP regarding what is a grey area of offensive content or things that could be construed as illegal or problematic from their perspective. Goodies I have here like the complete archive of alt.suicide.holiday or the many alt.flame.[insert ethnicity] groups for example. You *cannot* host thes things on the web on a Canadian ISP.
If you need any help.... :P
Ha! Rob peels off the mask, reveals himself to be Jas Hud. ;)
Appreciate the offer but I've got bigger fish to fry at the moment... looking at moving outta here to suburbia.
But I've yet to see a hosting company without some sort of restrictive AUP. As soon as you see lingo relating to offensive or "hate speech" its no dice.
Not to get off on a rant but I'm worried that one day, ISP's will
restrict Telnet entirely. Eventually no ISP will give any understanding to some weirdo running a "bulletin board system" on port 23. It will be lumped into that security-risk catagory along with Cisco routers, IP cameras, IOT etc.
paulie420 wrote to Atreyu <=-
Not to get off on a rant but I'm worried that one day, ISP's will
restrict Telnet entirely. Eventually no ISP will give any understanding to some weirdo running a "bulletin board system" on port 23. It will be lumped into that security-risk catagory along with Cisco routers, IP cameras, IOT etc.
I hear ya - but hopefully there will ALWAYS be options to run whatever
we want. While the big guys might continue to move that way, I'm sure we'll be able to find, use or build solutions that keep US running. :P
Not to get off on a rant but I'm worried that one day, ISP's will restrict Telnet entirely. Eventually no ISP will give any understanding to some weird running a "bulletin board system" on port 23. It will be lumped into that security-risk catagory along with Cisco routers, IP cameras, IOT etc.
I agree, especially in Canada. I believe it to be inevitable.
Free Speech for Everyone?
I run on a port that is not 23 because I get tired of script kiddles spamming my bbs.
I run on a port that is not 23 because I get tired of script kiddles spamming my bbs.
Me as well. I think its best to use an non standard port, anyway. Just
to keep the children at bay :)
It doesn't matter. The script kiddies, as you call them, are just other servers pinging for open ports. They'll find you no matter which port
you move it to.
It doesn't matter. The script kiddies, as you call them, are just other servers pinging for open ports. They'll find you no matter which port
you move it to.
Except they're not looking for BBSe
s, most of those port scanners are
looking for vulnerable services. It
takes time to scan 65355 ports, so
it's much quicker to only scan the
ones you know the vulnerable servic
es
you are looking for are running on.
Yes, I still get port scans on port
2323, I get a LOT less than on por
t
23.
I got almost none when using port 1
1892.
Andrew
That said, I'm sure the more your BBS host & port are out there on the internet and the more popular it becomes, the more bots that will find
it and start trying stuff.
Except they're not looking for BBSes, most of those port scanners are
looking for vulnerable services. It takes time to scan 65355 ports, so
it's much quicker to only scan the ones you know the vulnerable services
you are looking for are running on.
Yes, I still get port scans on port 2323, I get a LOT less than on port
23.
I got almost none when using port 11892.
You'll get a lot fewer *users* too. <shrug>
You'll get a lot fewer *users* too. <shrug>
Why? If people are savvy enough to connect to a BBS using telnet, surely they can change the port number in their client?
You'll get a lot fewer *users* too. <shrug>
Why? If people are savvy enough to connect to a BBS using telnet, surely they can change the port number in their client?
It's another thing to know about and do correctly, another barrier to
entry. Some users are savvy/capable, can figure things out on their
own, many are not. That's my experience anyway.
I've had my board on port 23 for 25+ years with no problems. On an XP
box.
while you could be fiddling around with a bbs
I think it more becomes a problem when you're running on something like a commodore 64 or something. I don't know, I don't have a problem either.
Oh, that didn't occur to me. I'm kind of used to "SBBS" sometimes (very rarely now) referring to SuperBBS, but I'd never seen Searchlight
referred to as "SBBS". If that's the case, my bad. :-)
It doesn't matter. The script kiddies, as you call them, are just other servers pinging for open ports. They'll find you no matter which port
you move it to.
It also helps having a 'required keypress' to not initiate an auto disconnect. I've seen ESC*2 on some boards, mine is ENTER. Most bots
that hit my board get booted by that alone.
Oh, that didn't occur to me. I'm kind of used to "SBBS" sometimes (very rarely now) referring to SuperBBS, but I'd never seen Searchlight referred to as "SBBS". If that's the case, my bad. :-)
Yeah, I ran a Searchlight board for several years and it was always referred to as SBBS. In fact I think the default file directory for the BBS files was named SBBS.
Re: Re: FidoNet; Ken Kaplan - and t
By: Alonzo to Digital Man on Sun Dec 15 2024 08:03 pm
Oh, that didn't occur to me. I'm kind of used to "SBBS" sometimes (very rarely now) referring to SuperBBS, but I'd never seen Searchlight referred to as "SBBS". If that's the case, my bad. :-)
Yeah, I ran a Searchlight board for several years and it was always referred to as SBBS. In fact I think the default file directory for the BBS files was named SBBS.
Oh, interesting. I'd heard/seen SLBBS in reference to Searchlight, but not SBBS. e.g. https://slbbs.org/
Alonzo wrote to Digital Man <=-
Yeah, I ran a Searchlight board for several years and it was always referred to as SBBS. In fact I think the default file directory for the BBS files was named SBBS.
Yeah, I ran a Searchlight board for several years and it was always
referred to as SBBS. In fact I think the default file directory for the BBS
files was named SBBS.
| Sysop: | Sarah |
|---|---|
| Location: | Portland, Oregon |
| Users: | 19 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 54:36:11 |
| Calls: | 126 |
| Calls today: | 126 |
| Files: | 84,009 |
| U/L today: |
5 files (318K bytes) |
| D/L today: |
33 files (8,385K bytes) |
| Messages: | 38,267 |
| Posted today: | 25 |
