Security Incidents mailing list archives

Re: A question for the list...


From: Ray Stirbei <me () highentropy org>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 23:12:35 -0400

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Its close in that spamming is unethical, at least according to IAB/rfc1087. It 
is also illegal in some states (http://www.spamlaws.com/us.html) and there 
were some trials.  

I could be wrong, but I suspect striking back in the context of Tim's proposal 
and others on this thread meant disabling the attacking host directly. To me, 
spam RBLs are analogous to packet filters that drop traffic from specific 
hosts attempting to connect to your network. 

ray



I have isolate the item above since it contains the gist of your
question.  My personal feeling is that sooner or later the owners of the
mis-managed devices in question will be held to the legal definition of
negligence which covers the "failure to take safe guards used by a
reasonable and prudent individual".

I don't think that this is the case.
Not that it couldn't be the case, but if
we say, Use "spammer" in place of worm host,,,

Many of us feel that spamming as it is practiced
(just about every way possible) is not proper network
use, and is in fact willful mismanagement. No one
is actually being taken to task, so many folks
have adopted a somewhat passive strike back by
using black hole lists to disallow access to
their sections of the network.

Isn't this sort of the same thing?


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- *** Wireless LAN Policies for Security & Management - NEW White Paper ***
Just like wired networks, wireless LANs require network security policies
that are enforced to protect WLANs from known vulnerabilities and threats.
Learn to design, implement and enforce WLAN security policies to lockdown
enterprise WLANs.

To get your FREE white paper visit us at:
http://www.securityfocus.com/AirDefense-incidents
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+0tenzejBliQ3SdsRAjyNAKC7kSOqAnwnuYNgpRUXHBuLWz1rewCfRG75
xTERx+wBgQsYLU7W4Uvs6vY=
=rqBA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Current thread: