nanog mailing list archives

Re: Solution: Re: Huge smurf attack


From: "Alex P. Rudnev" <alex () Relcom EU net>
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 21:14:14 +0300 (MSK)

Btw.

For the victim, there is not difference between -
- smurf amplifies abused by the hacker;
- broken box abused by the hacker to create flood attack;
- broken dialup provider abused to send spam.

Don't talk about the smurf, talk about badly-secured systems. Open 
direct-broadcast is one example; open SMTP relay is another one; 
non-fixed exploit abused to get root access is the third example.

This common case is - _someone does not secure his box/lan from abuse; 
what should we do_.

The forths case is (not yet) - ISP does allow to send frauded SRC 
addresses.


On Sat, 16 Jan 1999, Steven J. Sobol wrote:

Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 12:35:12 -0500
From: Steven J. Sobol <sjsobol () nacs net>
To: Harold Willison <harold () agis net>
Cc: Joe Shaw <jshaw () insync net>, nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: Solution: Re: Huge smurf attack

On Thu, Jan 14, 1999 at 12:46:44PM -0500, Harold Willison wrote:
 
Tracking down a smurf amplifier is not a problem. Getting the folks to 
fix it 
is a little harder than it should be now, as most of the folks left 
with open  
amplifiers have been notified and have to this point refused to fix or 
are unable to fix it. 

Oh, good... then if they refuse to fix their problem, and it can be documented
that they refuse to fix their problem, and someone uses them as an amplifier,
they can get sued. I hope we have some documentation that these people refuse
to do anything.
 
-- 
Steve Sobol [sjsobol () nacs net]
Part-time Support Droid [support () nacs net]
NACS Spaminator [abuse () nacs net]

Proud resident of Cleveland Heights, Ohio, the coolest place on earth.
http://www.ClevelandHeights.com


Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 239-10-10, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)



Current thread: