(fwd) Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product

[PJ <briareos () otherlands net>]

Forgot to include nanog

----- Forwarded message from PJ <briareos () otherlands net> -----

> Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:50:01 -0700
> From: PJ <briareos () otherlands net>
> Subject: Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product
> To: Clayton Fiske <clay () bloomcounty org>
> Message-ID: <20020516005001.GB2107 () elvander otherlands net>
> Reply-To: PJ <briareos () otherlands net>
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Clayton Fiske wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 05:22:39PM -0700, PJ wrote:
> > > Are you now operating under the premise that scans != anything but the
> > > prelude to an attack?  Sorry if I missed it earlier in the thread, but
> > > I would hate to think any legitimate scanning of a network or host
> > > would result in a false positive.  Even more, I would hate to see the
> > > advocation of a hostile reaction to what, so far, is not considered a
> > > crime.
> >
> > So you can think of a perfectly legitimate reason to scan someone else's
> > netblocks on specific TCP ports?
> >
> > -c
>
> Has no one ever tested firewall rules from external networks?  The
> fact remains is that a scan != an attack. 
>
> PJ
>
> -- 
> The worst thing one can do is not to try, to be aware of what one
> wants and not give in to it, to spend years in silent hurt wondering
> if something could have materialized -- and never knowing.
>                                       -- David Viscott