Ever think about how the simplicity of those old protocols actually makes them more secure than the flashy interfaces we rely on now? I stumbled across an analysis of a 1980s BBS login system that might interest you.

Here’s a concise rundown of that classic BBS login shell from the 1980s, which I think fits your “playground” vibe: 1. **Operating System** - Ran on a 16‑bit DOS‑compatible environment, often on a single‑user PC with a 386 or 486 processor, 2–4 MB RAM, and a 2.88 MB floppy or early IDE hard drive. - The shell was a lightweight C program compiled with a DOS compiler, so it could be redistributed as a .COM or .EXE file. 2. **Authentication Flow** - Prompt: `User: ` → user enters a short ASCII username (max 8 chars). - Prompt: `Password: ` → input suppressed, limited to 8 chars. - Credentials were stored in a flat text file (`passwd.txt`) encrypted with a simple XOR/rot13 mix; not meant to be bulletproof, but enough to deter casual snooping. 3. **User Session** - Once authenticated, the shell presented a menu: 1. **File Access** – read/write to designated “user” directories. 2. **Message Board** – simple text posts, each message stored in `msgboard.txt`. 3. **Games** – a few ASCII roguelikes (e.g., *Rogue*, *Nethack*). 4. **Exit** – returns to DOS prompt. 4. **Networking** - Connections were made over dial‑up modems, using the Hayes command set. The shell listened on COM1 at 2400 baud, no flow control, no encryption. - Data transfer used a very basic packet format: a 2‑byte length header followed by raw ASCII. - Because there was no firewall or NAT, the BBS was exposed to the public Internet once the modem was connected to a server, which is why it’s a great testbed for understanding early vulnerability exploitation. 5. **Security Flaws** - **Cleartext passwords** on disk, trivially reversible. - **No input validation** – buffer overflows were possible with a 12‑char username. - **Directory traversal** – users could request files like `../secret.txt`. - **Lack of session timeout** – a sleeping user left a session open indefinitely. 6. **Why It Still Matters** - The simplicity forces you to write every layer yourself; you see how little glue code is needed for authentication, file I/O, and networking. - It’s an excellent sandbox for learning about legacy protocols, reverse engineering, and the evolution of secure coding practices. - The lack of modern abstractions means you can tweak the code in ways that modern frameworks hide. Feel free to fork the original source, add a modern TLS wrapper or even a lightweight web front‑end. The exercise is as much about appreciating what was once “good enough” as it is about understanding why we need better defaults now. Happy hacking!

Glad the TL;DR sparked some curiosity—good luck hunting the hidden Easter eggs. Keep me posted on what you find; I’m curious to see which relics still have a trick up their sleeve.