[36839] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Chinese hackers plan week-long attack
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roger Marquis)
Sat Apr 21 13:13:04 2001
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com>
To: nanog-digest@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20010421151246.D568F5DE58@segue.merit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104210943520.47044-100000@roble.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Scott Francis <scott@virtualis.com> wrote:
> it's going to take more than one (or a hundred) data points to counter human
> nature (which is competitive, rather than cooperative). I guess I'm just a
> little too cynical to believe that the spirit of cooperation is enough to
> counter corporate greed, malicious activity and general cluelessness.
Cynical is right. This is not so much an issue of good vs. bad,
IMHO, but of cost vs. benefit. Whether nationality-based or other
hacking is a good thing or a bad thing perhaps depends on your
perspective (and defenses).
State sponsored information terrorists have to be encouraged by
our large number of weakly protected hosts and networks. Poor
monitoring, smurfable border routers, NOCs with no authority or
ability to implement ad-hoc filtering, sales sites running IIS...
On the other hand only a serious attack is going to motivate
political and economic interests to protect themselves.
The Internet today looks a lot like Europe before WWI with some
nations developing tank and rocket offenses (them) while others
are complacent with their cavalry-based defenses (us).
What defenses do NANOG operators have against well funded extra-national
attacks?
--
Roger Marquis
Roble Systems Consulting
http://www.roble.com/
