[177325] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Google's Safe Browsing Alerts for Network Administrators
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Frank Bulk)
Mon Jan 12 13:38:28 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk@iname.com>
To: "'Joe'" <jbfixurpc@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+zb_vFwJYUu2U_zpM57tDFQ7jeR2HjBeRZdJz1W=E-ccBRqeA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 12:38:20 -0600
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Thanks for that feedback on Google=E2=80=99s Safe Browsing Alerts. =
We=E2=80=99ll have to see how that works out for us over time.
=20
In regards to ShadowServer, I don=E2=80=99t think they=E2=80=99re =
randomly scanning networks, and neither are folks like OpenResolver =
=E2=80=93 I think it=E2=80=99s pretty systematic, albeit from perhaps =
only a certain point of view on the Internet. If their scans are being =
dropped and logged, that=E2=80=99s great =E2=80=93 that means someone =
has measures in place to mitigate attacks that leverage those UDP =
protocols. But for those who use their output to better secure their =
own and clients=E2=80=99 endpoint devices, it=E2=80=99s much =
appreciated. If it=E2=80=99s really just a drop in the ocean, what does =
it matter to you?
=20
Frank
=20
From: Joe [mailto:jbfixurpc@gmail.com]=20
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 10:39 AM
To: Frank Bulk
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Google's Safe Browsing Alerts for Network Administrators
=20
=20
I've not found it very usefull. As for Shadowserver.org I really wish =
folks trying to save the internet from mis-configurations would stop =
randomly scanning networks to fix. These folks are one of many =
"do-gooders" that are adding to the traffic being dropped and logged. =
Its only contibuting to the daily clutter of problem folk already poking =
and prodding.=20
=20
Regards,
-Joe
=20
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Frank Bulk <frnkblk@iname.com =
<mailto:frnkblk@iname.com> > wrote:
