[32957] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Port scanning legal
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leo Bicknell)
Tue Dec 19 16:01:24 2000
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:56:18 -0500
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20001219155618.A50854@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.05.10012191404560.816-100000@kerplewie>; from Alex Rubenstein on Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 02:06:04PM -0500
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 02:06:04PM -0500, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Shawn McMahon wrote:
> > How many ports must be scanned before you deem it an attack? Is one port
> > enough? Five? 50?
>
> I don't deem a port scan as vicious or an attack.
How about "scanning" 1 million ports per second, over and over again?
:-)
--
Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org
Systems Engineer - Internetworking Engineer - CCIE 3440
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
