On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 04:19:03PM -0400, John Fraizer wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, John Payne wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 01:13:35AM -0400, John Fraizer wrote:
The problem is that while some operators may not have been aware of their problem, if they are not aware of the problem at-large, they are, IMHO, not worthy of announcing to the global internet at large and as such, we should not be listening to their announcements.
So you wouldn't mind if people started scanning your network for other problems, say... rootable boxes? Without being able to break into remote boxes, kiddies wouldn't be able to launch smurf attacks of sizes to worry about.
random and not-so-random scans against our network are met with quite a few suprises for the scanner. It's NOT an exercise that I recommend. As a matter of fact, it's quite a BAD idea.
So why are you advocating scanning for smurf amps?
Beyond that, your assumption is completely in error about the kiddies needing rooted boxes to launch successful and quite large SMURF attacks. DSL and cable modems make it quite easy for them to do so.
Oh... well... not having experience with cable or dsl, I had assumed that cable and dsl were source filtered. My bad -- John Payne http://www.sackheads.org/jpayne/ john@sackheads.org http://www.sackheads.org/uce/ Fax: +44 870 0547954 To send me mail, use the address in the From: header