Software infrastructure

From: Hal Finney, <74076.1041@compuserve.com>
 
Mike Diehl's system sounds pretty good to me.  You can create messages, 
encrypt them, upload and send them, as well as downloading, decrypting, and 
reading messages, all with a nice menu-based interface.  That's what we 
want, right?
 
It sounds like the system would be easily adaptable to other types of hosts, 
too.  BBS operators could customize the scripts for their particular systems 
and offer the package.  We could create versions for users of other mail 
packages than elm on Unix systems, as well as for some of the commercial 
systems.  You could cover a lot of people this way.
 
> Well, if you have followed my this far, you either crazy or interested. ;^)  
> It puzzles me why we are contemplating writing our own comm package when so 
> many good ones are out there that can be made to serve our purposes.  I'm 
> open to comments.....  Fire away!
 
The only real problem I see is the use of Telix.  How much does this program 
cost?  We can't give away a disk with Telix on it.
 
What about Kermit?  It's free and it has a scripting language, but it 
doesn't sound nearly as advanced as Telix's.  Would it be good enough?  Or 
are their other free programs which we could use?
 
If we could adapt Kermit or some other free program to do what Mike is 
describing, we could give away floppies with secure and easy-to-use 
encrypted email handling capabilities, as well as making them available on 
the net.  People could just get the version they need for their particular 
mail access.method.  The package would include the communication program, 
the scripts, and the encryption software.  The user interface would be as 
Mike described, all menu driven and easy to use.
 
I think this would be a good way to go if we could get past the hurdle of 
finding a free comm program that would be adequate.

Note added in proof :)

Eric mentioned concerns about reliability.  Scripts can in principle be made
flexible enough to handle many sorts of errors.  You just need a lot of
states and a lot of result checking.  This technique of automatically
attaching to a host system and downloading data is widely used by computer
novices.  I just saw an ad today for a product which lets you create your
own "newspaper front page" graphically, then will log on to Compuserve and
fill in the news, sports, and business figures you have specified, and do
so at regular intervals, automatically, running in the background.  I often
use a package called Tapcis which automatically logs onto compuserve, getting
my mail and sending new mail, reading various topics of interest that I
have selected.  I used to use a Mac program called Navigator which did the
same.

Granted, none of these are scripts, they are all custom programs, but the
kinds of checking they do should be doable in scripts as well.  (I wasn't
sure whether Eric's point was that high level scripting languages are
excessively clumsy, or the more general point that automated mail access was
the wrong way to go.  I am addressing the latter here.)

Hal

You CAN give away disks with Telix, it is shareware, just like QModem
(pre-QMPro), and ProComm.  Just have to let the recipient know it is not
freeware but requires registration for continued use.  
Might have to obtain permission for such distribution, depends on the
licensing.

As for "is kermit good enough?"  No.  Almost NO ONE in the DOS world uses
it any more, it is a total anachronism.  Of all the 400 or so users on my
board, many from other parts of the country, even other countries, not
ONE uses kermit (I have "What comm program do you use?" as one of the
initial login questions).  The only practical use of Kermit is for
computer newbies to use it to access the dialup lines at their school
(UNM gives out free copies of it), but most such people soon switch to
another program. 

Thing is Kermit is just plain old, and a pain in the butt.  When I
started BBSing, the Kermit protocol was supported on most BBSs; today I
cannot think of a single BBS around here that has it anymore (I'm the
defacto city BBSlist maker, so I'd know :)

Perhaps this area is atypical, and Kermit is all the rage elsewhere, but
considering how BEHIND the times Albuquerque is, I tend to doubt it.

Freeware and shareware comm programs available from any BBS or FTP site
will DUST Kermit, and I think it's a dead end.  All I can say, is any
crypto package based on a hack of Kermit will go nowhere.  I know it's
free and readily available, but well so's a kick in the ass.  >;)

-- 
        When marriage is outlawed only outlaws will be inlaws!
Stanton McCandlish,  SysOp:  Noise in the Void DataCenter Library BBS
Internet anton@hydra.unm.edu     IndraNet: 369:1/1      FidoNet: 1:301/2     
Snail: 1811-B Coal Pl. SE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87108 USA
Data phone: +1-505-246-8515 (24hr, 1200-14400 v32bis, N-8-1)
Vox phone:  +1-505-247-3402 (bps rate varies, depends on if you woke me up...:)

> As for "is kermit good enough?"  No.  Almost NO ONE in the DOS world uses
> it any more, it is a total anachronism.  Of all the 400 or so users on my
> board, many from other parts of the country, even other countries, not
> ONE uses kermit (I have "What comm program do you use?" as one of the
> initial login questions).

programs come and go but protocols live forever.

i don't think you've looked around enough; in my own experience, kermit
has been available and in-use within every computing environment i've
operated or observed.  there are varying degrees of usage but its always
kept around, often because it seems to work in strange communications
conditions where other protocols fail.

>				...The only practical use of Kermit is for
> computer newbies to use it to access the dialup lines at their school
> (UNM gives out free copies of it), but most such people soon switch to
> another program. 
> ...
> Thing is Kermit is just plain old, and a pain in the butt.  When I
> started BBSing, the Kermit protocol was supported on most BBSs; today I
> cannot think of a single BBS around here that has it anymore (I'm the
> defacto city BBSlist maker, so I'd know :)

there are many places outside of the bbs world where people need to shuffle
files around and might desire encryption.  your opinions not withstanding,
i believe that kermit is more pervasive that you think.  if the purpose of
this exercise is to maximize the audience to which we make available easy
and useful encryption facilities, then kermit and things of its ilk need to
be supported.

				cheers,
				bruce

According to Stanton McCandlish:
> 
> As for "is kermit good enough?"  No.  Almost NO ONE in the DOS world uses
> it any more, it is a total anachronism.  Of all the 400 or so users on my
> board, many from other parts of the country, even other countries, not
> ONE uses kermit (I have "What comm program do you use?" as one of the
> initial login questions).  The only practical use of Kermit is for
> computer newbies to use it to access the dialup lines at their school
> (UNM gives out free copies of it), but most such people soon switch to
> another program. 

Correction, many people on this list use kermit...  And of course, I should 
know! ;^)

I do suggest that people get a (better) different comm program, as kermit is
IMHO rather limited.

> Thing is Kermit is just plain old, and a pain in the butt.  When I
> started BBSing, the Kermit protocol was supported on most BBSs; today I
> cannot think of a single BBS around here that has it anymore (I'm the
> defacto city BBSlist maker, so I'd know :)

True on all points. ;^)

> Perhaps this area is atypical, and Kermit is all the rage elsewhere, but
> considering how BEHIND the times Albuquerque is, I tend to doubt it.
> 
Behind the times?  Hell, we just got Caller-ID.  Yipee!

> Freeware and shareware comm programs available from any BBS or FTP site
> will DUST Kermit, and I think it's a dead end.  All I can say, is any
> crypto package based on a hack of Kermit will go nowhere.  I know it's
> free and readily available, but well so's a kick in the ass.  >;)
> 
Agreed.

+-----------------------+-----------------------------+---------+
| J. Michael Diehl ;-)  | I thought I was wrong once. | PGP KEY |
| mdiehl@triton.unm.edu |   But, I was mistaken.      |available|
| mike.diehl@fido.org   |                             | Ask Me! |
| (505) 299-2282        +-----------------------------+---------+
|                                                               |
+------"I'm just looking for the opportunity to be -------------+
|            Politically Incorrect!"   <Me>                     |
+-----If codes are outlawed, only criminals wil have codes.-----+
+----Is Big Brother in your phone?  If you don't know, ask me---+

According to nobody@soda.berkeley.edu:
> 
> From: Hal Finney, <74076.1041@compuserve.com>
>  
> Mike Diehl's system sounds pretty good to me.  You can create messages, 
> encrypt them, upload and send them, as well as downloading, decrypting, and 
> reading messages, all with a nice menu-based interface.  That's what we 
> want, right?
>  
> It sounds like the system would be easily adaptable to other types of hosts, 
> too.  BBS operators could customize the scripts for their particular systems 
> and offer the package.  We could create versions for users of other mail 
> packages than elm on Unix systems, as well as for some of the commercial 
> systems.  You could cover a lot of people this way.

Making it adaptable is what I mean by "cleaning it up a bit." ;^)

> > Well, if you have followed my this far, you either crazy or interested.;^)  
> > It puzzles me why we are contemplating writing our own comm package when so 
> > many good ones are out there that can be made to serve our purposes.  I'm 
> > open to comments.....  Fire away!
>  
> The only real problem I see is the use of Telix.  How much does this program 
> cost?  We can't give away a disk with Telix on it.

Telix is "user supported software."  Registering it costs $39.

>  
> What about Kermit?  It's free and it has a scripting language, but it 
> doesn't sound nearly as advanced as Telix's.  Would it be good enough?  Or 
> are their other free programs which we could use?

I remember kermit's script language as being kinda messy...  At the end of this
message, I will include a portion of my, uncommented, script to compare.  Also,
kermit is (I think) restricted to one xfer protocol, which may not be a good
idea.

> If we could adapt Kermit or some other free program to do what Mike is 
> describing, we could give away floppies with secure and easy-to-use 
> encrypted email handling capabilities, as well as making them available on 
> the net.  People could just get the version they need for their particular 
> mail access.method.  The package would include the communication program, 
> the scripts, and the encryption software.  The user interface would be as 
> Mike described, all menu driven and easy to use.

Well, either way, I will contribute my user-interface if you'all want it.  I'm
not married to telix, but I do think it is very good.  We could write comparable
scripts in every major comm program script language.... I'd have to document
my interface.  But if I decide to port my interface to C, I'd like to change 
a few things, so maybe this is a bit premature.....

> I think this would be a good way to go if we could get past the hurdle of 
> finding a free comm program that would be adequate.
> Note added in proof :)

I don't understand this last comment.  Maybe it's obvious and I'm just tired...
Part of my script system is after my signature.  Note that I hacked in a C
preprocesser, and this is the output from it, just before the script is compiled
Yes, Telix scripts are compiled! ;^)

 
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+---------+
| J. Michael Diehl ;-)  | I thought I was wrong once. | PGP KEY |
| mdiehl@triton.unm.edu |   But, I was mistaken.      |available|
| mike.diehl@fido.org   |                             | Ask Me! |
| (505) 299-2282        +-----------------------------+---------+
|                                                               |
+------"I'm just looking for the opportunity to be -------------+
|            Politically Incorrect!"   <Me>                     |
+-----If codes are outlawed, only criminals wil have codes.-----+
+----Is Big Brother in your phone?  If you don't know, ask me---+


str	PROMPT[] = "%";
str	PASSWRD[15];
 
command( str cmd ) 
{
	enter( cmd );
	while ( ! waitfor(PROMPT, 90));
}
 
enter( str cmd )
{
	cputs( cmd );
	cputs( "^M" );
}
 
match( str rec, str snd )
{
	while ( ! waitfor(rec, 90));
	enter( snd );
}
 
 
 
str	name[40] = "",
	file[40] = "",
	subject[40] = "",
	buff[80];
 
int	f,
	i;
 
main()
{ 
	if ( ! carrier()) 
		if ( dial("1", 10, 0) < 1) {
			prints("Could not dial in.");
			exittelix();
		}
 
	cputs("^M");
	command("biff n");
	
	if ( ! waitfor("%", 90)) {
		prints("No prompt after login");
		return;
	}
	
/*/ routing format is:  filename\n address\n subject\n /*/ 

	if ((f = fopen("c:\uload\mail\routing", "r")) ==0) return;
	while (feof(f) == 0) {
 
		fgets(file, 40, f);
		if (feof(f) != 0) continue;
		fgets(name, 40, f);
		if (feof(f) != 0) continue;
		fgets(subject, 40, f);
		if (feof(f) != 0) continue;
 
		buff = "";
		strcat(buff, "elm ");
		strcat(buff, name);
		enter(buff);
 
		match("Subject:", subject);
		delay_scr(10);
		cputs("i");
		_asc_scrtrans=1;
		_asc_slftrans=0;
		send('A', file);
		command("^[:wq^Ms^M");  
 
		fdelete(file);
 
	} 
	fdelete("c:\uload\mail\routing");
	
 
	f = fclose(f);
}