On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 6:43 PM Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:
On 6/2/23 20:39, Owen DeLong wrote:
After all, they’re only collecting addresses to ban at the rate they’re actually being used to send packets.
Yeah, but the whole point of banning is that the banned address is actually used by an attacker subsequently,
You both have valuable points here. Listen to each other. On the one hand, sophisticated attackers already scatter attacks between source addresses to evade protection software. Attackers who don't have control over their computer's IP address do not. This is not new and IPv6 does not really change that picture. On the other hand, there are so many addresses in a /64 that an attacker can literally use a fresh one for each and every probe he sends. Without a process for advancing the /128 ban to a /64 ban (and releasing it once activity stops), reactive firewalls are likely to become less and less effective. Regards, Bill Herrin -- For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/