nanog mailing list archives
Re: black hat .cn networks
From: George William Herbert <gherbert () retro com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 15:32:05 -0700
Is it worthwhile to bother given the low rate and relatively low proficiency of attacks so far? They're trying to make a statement, sure, and doing some vandalism in the process. But it doesn't appear from any firsthand reports I have or news reports I've seen so far that any serious damage has been done anywhere. Dropping a country due to annoyance is a pretty serious step. If their ministry were directly encouraging all out serious attacks that would be a different thing, but I don't see any justification to do anything yet. Feel free to correct above impression of damage if you have better info than I do so far. -george william herbert gherbert () retro com
Current thread:
- RE: black hat .cn networks, (continued)
- RE: black hat .cn networks Dan Hollis (Apr 30)
- RE: black hat .cn networks mdevney (Apr 30)
- RE: black hat .cn networks Mike Leber (Apr 30)
- RE: black hat .cn networks Dan Hollis (Apr 30)
- RE: black hat .cn networks Aaron Dewell (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks Walter Prue (Apr 30)
- RE: black hat .cn networks Segal, Mark (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks Brett Frankenberger (Apr 30)
- RE: black hat .cn networks Dan Hollis (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks k claffy (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks George William Herbert (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks Richard A. Steenbergen (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks Shawn McMahon (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks Dan Hollis (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks Shawn McMahon (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks Roger Marquis (Apr 30)
- Re: black hat .cn networks Kevin Day (Apr 30)
- RE: black hat .cn networks Roeland Meyer (Apr 30)