anybody knows the physical location of all root name servers, or a pointer ? thx /Bert
On Tue, Oct 27, 1998 at 08:29:43AM -0800, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
anybody knows the physical location of all root name servers, or a pointer ? Is it really important?
The sort of person who wants to know this is roughly the same sort of person who is interested in knowing that the AT&T Startum 1 clock is in Hillsboro MO. You know: geeks. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Buy copies of The New Hackers Dictionary. The Suncoast Freenet Give them to all your friends. Tampa Bay, Florida http://www.ccil.org/jargon/ +1 813 790 7592
On Tue, Oct 27, 1998 at 08:03:23PM -0500, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
The sort of person who wants to know this is roughly the same sort of person who is interested in knowing that the AT&T Startum 1 clock is in Hillsboro MO.
ObGeek: THANKS, JAY! -- Steve Sobol [sjsobol@nacs.net] Part-time Support Droid [support@nacs.net] NACS Spaminator [abuse@nacs.net] Spotted on a bumper sticker: "Possum. The other white meat."
Jay R. Ashworth writes...
On Tue, Oct 27, 1998 at 08:29:43AM -0800, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
anybody knows the physical location of all root name servers, or a pointer ? Is it really important?
The sort of person who wants to know this is roughly the same sort of person who is interested in knowing that the AT&T Startum 1 clock is in Hillsboro MO.
You know: geeks. :-)
OTOH, some of us don't care about those root servers because we already know where our own root servers are. All but one of my DNS servers are grass roots servers. You can take down all the root servers, and if that didn't also take out the TLD (e.g. .COM, .NET, .ORG, .GOV) servers, then I won't notice it much (except to wonder why there is a dropoff in my load on smtp and http). BTW, knowing where the main root servers are topologically is probably more dangerous than knowing where they all are physically. And that is information most everyone already has. -- -- *-----------------------------* Phil Howard KA9WGN * -- -- | Inturnet, Inc. | Director of Internet Services | -- -- | Business Internet Solutions | eng at intur.net | -- -- *-----------------------------* philh at intur.net * --
At 12:30 AM 10/27/98 -0500, you wrote:
anybody knows the physical location of all root name servers, or a pointer ?
There is a very nice graphic (world map) of servers A-M which includes the name of the organization running the server, as well as the town location... this graphic is located at: http://www.wia.org/pub/rootserv.html Russ
Hi there. Apparently rootshell.com pages had been hacked this morning by crackers using ssh-1.2.26.? Any got more news about this event, regards "May you live in interesting times" by chinese ppl
Supposedly sendmail 8.9.1 is to blame, not ssh. http://www.sendmail.com/sendmail.8.9.1a.html
Hi there. Apparently rootshell.com pages had been hacked this morning by crackers using ssh-1.2.26.?
Any got more news about this event,
regards
"May you live in interesting times" by chinese ppl
I thought they were runnign qmail? Joe On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, JR Mayberry wrote:
Supposedly sendmail 8.9.1 is to blame, not ssh. http://www.sendmail.com/sendmail.8.9.1a.html
Scratch that, I was quoting a source which was inaccurate. only email clients are vulnerable. apologies.
Supposedly sendmail 8.9.1 is to blame, not ssh. http://www.sendmail.com/sendmail.8.9.1a.html
Hi there. Apparently rootshell.com pages had been hacked this morning by crackers using ssh-1.2.26.?
Any got more news about this event,
regards
"May you live in interesting times" by chinese ppl
JR Mayberry wrote:
Supposedly sendmail 8.9.1 is to blame, not ssh. http://www.sendmail.com/sendmail.8.9.1a.html
MIME buffer overflows is *not* a sendmail problem. What made you say this? -- Michael L. Barrow <mlbarrow@eni.net> Principal Security Engineer, Epoch Internet Corporate Security T:949.399.8413, F:949.474.8127 PGP Fingerprint = 6E56 4590 F1AF 0CCA 2563 07C2 26EF B164 F5C4 BE8C
From Rootshell's own page: "On Wed Oct 28th at 5:12AM PST the main Rootshell page was defaced by a group of crackers. Entry to the machine was made via SSH (secure shell) which is an encrypted interface to the machine at 04:57AM PST this morning. Rootshell was first informed of this incident at 6:00 AM PST and
It was yesterday morning actually. the site was immediately brought offline. The site was back up and operational by 8:00AM PST. We are still in the process of investigating the exact methods that were used. The paranoid MAY want to disable ssh 1.2.26. Rootshell runs Linux 2.0.35, ssh 1.2.26, qmail 1.03, Apache 1.3.3, and nothing else. The attackers used further filesystem corruption to make it harder to remove the damaged HTML files." It could have been ssh, qmail, Apache, or some script they ran on the server that caused the root compromise. SSH was just the way they got in, probably after they compromised root. My only question is, if they were running ssh-1.2.26, why Kit points to the ssh2 protocol specs in his posting? Doesn't ssh-1.2.26 only support ssh ver1 specs? Joe On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, neil wrote:
Hi there. Apparently rootshell.com pages had been hacked this morning by crackers using ssh-1.2.26.?
Any got more news about this event,
regards
"May you live in interesting times" by chinese ppl
participants (11)
-
bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com -
Jay R. Ashworth -
Joe Shaw -
JR Mayberry -
Michael L. Barrow -
Nathan Stratton -
neil -
noc＠nso.org -
Phil Howard -
Russ Haynal -
Steven J. Sobol