nanog mailing list archives

Re: Worms versus Bots


From: Chris Woodfield <rekoil () semihuman com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 13:14:21 -0400

I stand corrected, they're out there. I'm advised that 3com has a on-NIC firewall 
product as well.

However, at $299 and $329 respectively, I don't anticipate wide adoption in the 
consumer market...

-C

On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 12:49:05PM -0400, Jonathan M. Slivko wrote:

Uh... they have. It's called a Snapgear card :)
-- Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On Behalf Of
Chris Woodfield
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 12:42 PM
To: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Cc: Petri Helenius; Michael.Dillon () radianz com; nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: Worms versus Bots

Simple solution...build the on-NIC firewall to not use uPnP, or at least
require 
a password before changing rulesets. :)

Seriously, this is such a stupidly simple solution that I'm amazed no one's
attempted 
to make a product out of it yet. 

-C

On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 12:21:29PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:
On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:38:33 EDT, Chris Woodfield said:

A better solution would be a NIC with a built-in SI
firewall...manageable from a host
app, but physically separate from the OS running on the PC.

Gaak.  No. ;)

What's the point of a firewall, if the first piece of malware that does
manage
to sneak in (via a file-sharing program, or a webpage that installs
malware, or
an "ooh! Shiny!" email attachment) just does the network Plug-N-Play call
to
tell the firewall "Shield DOWN!"?




Attachment: _bin
Description:


Current thread: