nanog mailing list archives

Re: Packet anonymity is the problem?


From: Joe Maimon <jmaimon () ttec com>
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 18:03:39 -0400




Jeff Workman wrote:




--On Sunday, April 11, 2004 2:45 PM -0400 Joe Maimon <jmaimon () ttec com> wrote:

Therefore the "good" people should beat the bad people to the punch and
write the worm first. Make it render the vulnerable system invulnerable
or if neccessary crash it/disable the port etc..... so that the "lazy"
administrators fix it quick without losing their hard drive contents or
taking out the neighborhood.

Such "corrective" behavior as suggested by you might also be implemented
in such a "proactive" worm.

How many fewer zombies would there be if this was happening?


As I understand it, Netsky is supposed to be such a worm. Doesn't seem to make much of a difference, does it?

I thought that Nachi/Welchia was supposed to be such a worm as well, and it ended up doing more harm than good.

One could argue that those were implementation issues, probably performed by people who did not know what they were doing.


-J

--
Jeff Workman | jworkman () pimpworks org | http://www.pimpworks.org




Current thread: