April 2005 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Finally -- an analogy I can relate to. ;-) As an aside, perhaps if we worked on making the Internet "safer", as opposed to strictly "safe", we might make some progress. You know -- baby steps. And Big Pond is my hero. :-) http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/communications/0,2000061791,39188135,00.htm - ferg -- Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis(a)neustar.biz> wrote: If we can't make it easy to get to happy hour, how are we going to make the Internet safe? -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

2 1

Another panix.com scenario? Hushmail this time
by ops.lists＠gmail.com 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/25/hushmail_dns_attack/> "Surfers trying to visit the web site of popular secure email service Hushmail were redirected to a false site early Sunday following a hacking attack. Hush Communications said hackers changed Hushmail's DNS records after "compromising the security" of its domain registrar (Network Solutions). These changes were undone after a few hours on Sunday and normal Hushmail services have now been restored."

2 1

Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden
by Greg Boehnlein 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Brad Knowles wrote: > At 8:13 AM -0400 2005-04-27, Greg Boehnlein wrote: > > > As for security, intelligent ISPs will be monitoring their network and > > will have sensors in place to alert them to abnormal traffic (NetFlow, > > Snort, SNMP Traps, Log watchers) patterns and take action, but that does > > NOT extend to enforcing a security policy on the public without their > > consent. > > This assumes intelligence on the part of ISPs. This is no more > valid than assuming that all users are intelligent. No, it assumes that some ISPs are intelligent and that they will do what is neccessary. Darwinism will take care of the less intelligent. ;) -- Vice President of N2Net, a New Age Consulting Service, Inc. Company http://www.n2net.net Where everything clicks into place! KP-216-121-ST

1 0

Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

I understand that, but opinions being what they are, everyone is certainly entitled to have one of their own. Placing value on those opinions is an exercise left to the reader. And not everyone's opinions are constructed to to simply allow financial benefit -- somethimes it is just a simple observation. Cheers, - ferg -- Mark Newton <newton(a)internode.com.au> wrote: > > Schneier isn't a journalist or reporter; He's a security vendor. > > And you're a network engineer. What's your point? Merely that Owen's expectation of "journalistic ethic, fact checking, or unbiased reporting" was misplaced because his remarks are addressing someone who has a vested interest in the outcome of the debate, not an ethical, unbiased disinterested observer. - mark -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

bearing burdens
by bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

faster than ADSL and removes the telco for last-mile considerations. http://www.notes.co.il/benbasat/10991.asp --bill

1 0

Re: clarity
by John Clarke 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Missing here is a critical part of the analogy - if it's to apply to the internet, we have to assume that the contaminants we are speaking of are put back INTO the system from the end user, just just delivered in one direction. Rare, I would assume, is the ability of a water end user to put back water into the system, unless we also speak of the waste disposal system too :) /john On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 03:19:04AM -0700, Owen DeLong is reputed to have mumbled: > > --On Wednesday, April 27, 2005 7:39 +0000 bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com > wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:13:16AM -0700, Dragos Ruiu wrote: > >> On April 26, 2005 11:36 pm, bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > >> > On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 10:38:00PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> > > I think it's absurd. I expect my water delivery company not to add > >> > > polutants in transit. I expect my water production company to > >> > > provide clean water. > >> > > >> > er.. bad analogy warning... please take a sample of tap water > >> > to an independent lab for analysis... and find out just what > >> > the water company is putting into your water. > >> > >> Actually that _is_ a bad analogy. > >> > >> According to my sister (who works in that area as a regional water > >> expert), tap-water is held to higher standards than bottled water. > >> In Canada at least... ymmv. > >> > >> cheers, > >> --dr > > > > perhaps you mis-read. water companies -always- > > add things to water, to kill off germs, balance mineral content, > > etc.. they do this to -meet- the "higher" standards. > > and by their tampering, they pollute the water... > > their pollution may make the water drinkable and safe. > > does n ot change the fact that the water was tampered with. > > > Bill, I was very specific about transit. > > Yes, most water transit companies are also the water supply company, but, > in my analogy, and, in some areas, as a matter of fact, they are not the > same. The chemical tampering of which you speak is done by the water > supply company at the supply point before it is put in the pipes for > transit to the end user. > > The water delivery company runs said pipes, and, my expectation from them > is that they deliver what they got from the water supply company without > any additional contaminants. > > Think of the web hoster as a water supply company. The household user > is an end user. The ISP is merely a pipeline. > > Owen > > > --bill > > > -- John L Clarke III shibumi.com PGP: DF3D D546 596E EC16 2A96 BEDA F3AC A45C PGP: C3C4 938A D83B 6CB3 F9E8 3201 94F5 9A80

1 0

FCC Chief Wants 911 Service for Internet Phones
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Prepare for the inevitable. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050426/wr_nm/telecoms_voip_91… - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

2 1

Internet2
by Vicky Rode 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi there, Just wondering how's internet2 community/partners protecting themselves from lawsuits of illegal use of music/movie downloads. In general, how are they protecting themselves from malicious code infection spreading at internet2 speed? How are the devices coping up with filters in place, if any? Like to hear what nanog community and the people who are involved w/ internet2 connectivity think. Any insight and /or pointers to any papers will be appreciated. regards, /vicky -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCbp19pbZvCIJx1bcRApbRAKCNWtZP/f+5TPwzB0gkU7tLmgpq9gCgiR+H bsR8d1Ai9zWFnUQeXPPB7fs= =ebza -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

9 13

Sheet could shelter Wi-Fi from eavesdroppers
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Well, occasionally something really cool comes along, and you just gotta share it. :-) This is semi-operational, so.... http://news.com.com/Sheet+could+shelter+Wi-Fi+from+eavesdroppers/2100-1029_… ..there. :-) - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

2 1

Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden
by Joe Shen 27 Apr '05

27 Apr '05

Hi, maybe this is an OLD topic, but the problem is "what is security? " or "how to define a secure internet access service ". E.g. should ISP respond for managing application transmitted across its backbone? if so, how to define "standard" appliation model while keeping internet a flexible platform? Could we maintein the scalability of IP network while keeping it secure & high performance? To business consideration , would people pay more money for a limited, "secure" internet access service while his/her child is able to visit those Nude website? So, IMHO, it's a good idea but it's not a feasible proposal. Joe --- Jerry Pasker <info(a)n-connect.net> wrote: > > >I've been there -- I know how I feel about it -- > but I'd love > >to know how ISP operations folk feel about this. > > > > > It means 10 different things to 10 different people. > The article was > vague. "Security" could mean blocking a few ports, > simple Proxy/NAT, > blocking port 25 (or 139... or 53.. heh heh) or a > thousand different > things. There is a market for this, it's called > "managed services." > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? 嫌邮箱太小？雅虎电邮自助扩容！ http://cn.rd.yahoo.com/mail_cn/tag/10m/*http://cn.mail.yahoo.com/event/10m.…

1 0