[32350] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Operational impact of filtering SMB/NETBIOS traffic?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Shawn McMahon)
Sun Nov 19 18:54:43 2000
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:52:41 -0500
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon@eiv.com>
To: Mike Johnson <mike.johnson@isunnetworks.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20001119185241.B5200@eiv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="wzJLGUyc3ArbnUjN"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20001119163011.A1728@i-sun.net>; from mike.johnson@isunnetworks.com on Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 04:30:12PM -0500
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--wzJLGUyc3ArbnUjN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 04:30:12PM -0500, Mike Johnson wrote:
>=20
> I've been reading this thread, and from the get go I've been wondering
> why an ISP would consider filtering SMB, SSH, telnet, or any other well
> used protocol. I suppose I'm under the opinion that an ISP should let
> their customers shoot themselves in the foot.
Because the majoriy of one's customers are clueless morons, open to being
owned by the 31337-haX0rs of the world.
So it is better to block it by default, and open it where requested, than to
leave it open and thereby be the source of a massive DoS that gets your
IP blackholed to major networks, your business disrupted, and possibly
your equipment confiscated by overzealous FBI or Secret Service agents.
Better a couple of customers briefly pissed off than a lot of customers pis=
sed
off at length.
--wzJLGUyc3ArbnUjN
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE6GGfJEcl9bQ0RMt0RAhCBAJ9Fb/V0TxIb0PCU5BNq44Jm/kBDowCfVgn1
UF0S1PDszfE4gxPKX0H83J8=
=nFHB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--wzJLGUyc3ArbnUjN--
