nanog mailing list archives
Re: Packet anonymity is the problem?
From: Yann Berthier <yb () sainte-barbe org>
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 11:51:45 +0200
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
Ok, then explain to me how removing bugs from the code I run prevents me from being the victim of denial of service attacks.
It's the other way around in fact: if others were to run (more) secure code, there would be far less boxen used as zombies to launch ddos attacks against your infrastructure, to propagate worms, and to be used as spam relays. While it can sound a bit theorical (to hope that the "others" will run secure code), as the vast majority of users run OSs from one particular (major) vendor, an amelioration of said family of OSs would certainly benefit to all. Just think about all the recent network havocs caused by worms propagating on one OS platform ... - yann
Current thread:
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem?, (continued)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Dan Hollis (Apr 10)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Paul Vixie (Apr 10)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Joe Provo (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Petri Helenius (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Joe Maimon (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Jeff Workman (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Joe Maimon (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Jeff Workman (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Steven M. Bellovin (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Yann Berthier (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Iljitsch van Beijnum (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Yann Berthier (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Owen DeLong (Apr 11)
- Re: Packet anonymity is the problem? Henry Linneweh (Apr 11)
- Delayed mail [WAS: Packet anonymity is the problem?] Patrick W . Gilmore (Apr 14)