RE: How many backbones here are filtering the makelovenotspam scr eensaver site?

["Hannigan, Martin" <hannigan () verisign com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 4:14 PM
> To: nanog list
> Subject: Re: How many backbones here are filtering the makelovenotspam
> scr eensaver site?
>
>
>
> on Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 08:58:03PM +0000, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Steven Champeon wrote:
> >
> > > on Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 02:56:29PM -0500, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
> > > > Possibly. What will happen if the Lycos botnet gets hijacked?
> > > >
> > > > The conversations between the clients and the servers 
> don't appear
> > > > to be keyed. If a million clients got owned, it would be the
> > > > equivalent of an electronic Bubonic Plague with no antidote.
> > >
> > > You mean, like the existing botnets we already know exist but are
> > > already under the control of spammers?
> > >
> > > What's the difference? Why is everyone so upset about 
> Lycos and nobody
> > > seems to be doing much of anything about the /existing 
> botnets/, which
> > > conservative estimates[1] already put at anywhere from 
> 1-3K per botnet
> > > to upwards of 1-5M hosts total[2]?
> >
> > perhaps the difference is 'reponsible people' don't go out 
> and recruit
> > botnets... Lycos, as a corporate entity with it's business 
> model dependent
> > upon the health and wellbeing of the Internet would try to be
> > 'responsible', or so I would have thought.
>
> I agree. I also think it's up to the companies providing the Internet
> connectivity to the non-Lycos-"owned" botnets to prevent such activity
> from affecting others. 
>  
> > arguing that there are murderers and rapists out there and 
> that 'nothing
> > is being done' is hardly reason to become one yourself.
>
> I couldn't agree more that vigilantism isn't the answer. My earlier
> remarks were directed to the shock and awe evident in the possibility
> that - via Lycos - there might be, heaven forbid, /large numbers of
> computers under the control of spammers, that could be used 
> in spamming
> and abuse/.

Can you direct me toward a singluar entity of 1MM bots controlled by
a single master?

> All I was pointing out was that, surprise, surprise, there 
> already are.
> So why anyone thinks Lycos' botnet being hacked is /any 
> different/ from
> /the current situation/ is utterly beyond my ken. Why would 
> any spammer
> bother to hack Lycos' botnet? They /already have their own/.


I think you might be behind on what's going on in botland
lately.