-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:22 AM, James Hess <mysidia@gmail.com> wrote:
An in-depth strategy with hundreds or thousands of factors examined results in a smaller (but still present) possibility of the filter/detector being fooled.
IP-based methods can be combined with the other stronger analysis of transaction details and other info that can be gathered about a submitter for detection of attempted abuse.
Personally, I don;t NANOG is the proper forum for this discussion. There are other forums, however, which do follow these issues -- some public, some private. If folks think that people are not "doing" massive correlation of criminal activity on the Internet, they would be mistaken. - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.3 (Build 3017) wj8DBQFJQ3JBq1pz9mNUZTMRAjqTAKD30/yrEYWu1ep4v7cOH2q3++aKRQCg2Sad wwap7dwpUiOv6r/w5st04KQ= =AZDw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/