dheller@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Dan Heller) (07/26/89)
I get mailer-daemon messages every once in a while from sites that say they can't contact site such-n-such for N days.. To kill the job, issue the command uustat -k<job>. Since I don't talk uucp to that machine, how do I issue the command to kill the message? Dan Heller <island!argv@sun.com>
allbery@nc386.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) (07/31/89)
In article <15813@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, dheller@cory (Dan Heller) writes: +--------------- | I get mailer-daemon messages every once in a while from sites | that say they can't contact site such-n-such for N days.. To | kill the job, issue the command uustat -k<job>. +--------------- One of the few bogosities in HDB UUCP: the "uustat -k" stuff only works for local users, but HDB sends it to remote users with stuck mail as well. It's just as annoying for us remote uucp sites as it is to you: I can't run a "uustat -k" on someone else's system. ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery, moderator of comp.sources.misc allbery@NCoast.ORG uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu * This message brought to you courtesy the "Watcher" for the 4th NCoast *
honey@mailrus.cc.umich.edu (peter honeyman) (08/06/89)
i agree that the uustat -k message is gross. locally, i changed it to something along the lines of "we can't ... attempts will continue ..." without the obtuse (and usually invalid) uustat -k advice. but this requires source code. (uucleanup was once a shell script; dan fixed that bug ...) peter ps: yes, i sent my changes to summit, as if that ever mattered.
argv%eureka@Sun.COM (Dan Heller) (08/08/89)
In article honey@citi.umich.edu (Peter Honeyman) writes: > i agree that the uustat -k message is gross. Incidentally -- I got *lots* of responses to this which includes: "you can't kill a uucp message" "login to that host and do the uustat command like it says!" "Do you have a termcap entry for the commodore 64?" "Send email to postmaster@offending.site and ask them to do it for you." I opted for the last one. Perhaps it would be nice to set up an automation script that can do this automatically (of course, authentication would be highly desired :-). Just email to "uukill@offending.site" and the subject would contain the job to kill.. just an idea. dan <island!argv@sun.com> ----- My postings reflect my opinion only -- not the opinion of any company.
pcf@galadriel.bt.co.uk (Pete French) (08/08/89)
From article <119830@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>, by argv%eureka@Sun.COM (Dan Heller): > > I opted for the last one. Perhaps it would be nice to set up an automation > script that can do this automatically (of course, authentication would be > highly desired :-). Just email to "uukill@offending.site" and the subject > would contain the job to kill.. just an idea. > How would you specify the message that you wanted to kill ? And if you could then how would you stop other people blatting your outgoing mail ? The best place to kill mail is surely at its point of origin ... I am not sure that any other way is practical. If anoyone here reads comp.unix.wizards they may have seen the "Tao of programming" saga. Somebody posted a transcript of a (C) book to the net ! There should be some method of preventing things like that spreading, but sadly to send out the "kill this uucp file" message requires it to overtake the original posting/mail which in a lot of cases will not happed. The end result is that anything which is posted will reach a large number of people despite the best efforts of the postmasters. -Pete French. Inmcedentally - why should you have a termcap for a C64 ?
argv%eureka@Sun.COM (Dan Heller) (08/10/89)
In article <312@galadriel.bt.co.uk> pcf@galadriel.bt.co.uk (Pete French) writes: > From article <119830@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>, by argv%eureka@Sun.COM (Dan Heller): > > > > I opted for the last one. Perhaps it would be nice to set up an automation > > script that can do this automatically (of course, authentication would be > > highly desired :-). Just email to "uukill@offending.site" and the subject > > would contain the job to kill.. just an idea. > How would you specify the message that you wanted to kill ? And if you > could then how would you stop other people blatting your outgoing mail ? Uucp just sent you a message saying, "to kill the mail, issue the command uustat -k..." Well, you simply mail that same job number to the uustat server. If the job is still queued, it has the envelope for the message going out -- just check that address against yours and verify that they are the same. After all, uucp successfully sent a message back to the originating site of the mail that is queued, it should certainly be able to check that the address is contructed to send you that mail matches the the return address on the mail you just sent it. Further, the uustat server could also reply to queries about what's in its queue -- that way, you could check on things that are outgoing from that site. Again, this "feature" would only work if the uustat server successfully verified that the requestor's address matched the return address of the originating author. Short of that, the person must mail the postmaster at that site and ask that person to do it manually. dan <island!argv@sun.com> ----- My postings reflect my opinion only -- not the opinion of any company.
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (08/11/89)
In article <120415@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> argv@sun.UUCP (Dan Heller) writes: [ ..remote uustat server to kill jobs..] >> How would you specify the message that you wanted to kill ? And if you >> could then how would you stop other people blatting your outgoing mail ? >Uucp just sent you a message saying, "to kill the mail, issue the command >uustat -k..." Well, you simply mail that same job number to the uustat >server. If the job is still queued, it has the envelope for the message >going out -- just check that address against yours and verify that they >are the same. The problem here is that it is trivial to fake authorship of uucp mail. SysV mail uses the environment variable LOGNAME as the sender, so: LOGNAME=you mail somewhere!someone is all it takes. >Further, the uustat server could also reply to queries about what's in its >queue -- that way, you could check on things that are outgoing from that site. This might be the ticket. Receiving mail is fairly secure, so if the uustat server mailed you back a magic cookie id that couldn't be obtained any other way, knowing that id could allow you to delete the job. If you fake the sender's name on the outgoing message, the real user will get the returned information. The normal uustat id number would not work as well, since it can be obtained by anyone with access to the machine. Les Mikesell