On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
Spoofed packets are harder to trace to the source than non-spoofed packets. Knowing where a malicious packet is very important to the
this is patently incorrect: www.secsup.org/Tracking/ has some information you might want to review. Tracking spoofed attacks is infact EASIER than non-spoofed attacks, especially if your network has a large 'edge'.
Errr... you don't need to _track_ non-spoofed attacks - you _know_ where the source is. Instead of going box to box back to the source (most likely across several providers) you can immediately go to _their_ provider.
so long as you are sure they aren't spoofed, yes. The point I mis-made was that tracking the spoofed attacks back to your edge is quicker since in many cases the non-spoofed attacks come from 'everywhere' so blocking traffic becomes a null route very quickly :( (unless the upstreams from your edge device can absorb the load and the protocol/ports being flooded are not critical to the business of the box being hammered.