[46314] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: PacBell Security/Abuse Contact
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Mon Mar 25 16:05:37 2002
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 16:00:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <gu9k7s08k1u.fsf@marvin.argfrp.us.uu.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.40.0203251551150.27939-100000@clifden.donelan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>>>>> "db" == David Barak <thegameiam@yahoo.com> writes:
db> Regarding securiy issues, I'd suggest working with
db> UUNet/Worldcom (or whatever AS701 is called lately).
db> I've seen some of their folks work closely with
db> aggrieved victims of DDOS attacks.
Historically, BBN/Genuity/GTE/Verizon/Genuity... and
Alternet/UUNET/MFS/Worldcom have been consistently
the most responsive to security issues. Of course, they
each have their good days, and their bad days. MCI was
good, AT&T is improving.
The most common problem is different carriers have different
views on what is a "security" issue. And they each have
their quirks on how you reach their security people. Often
Abuse, Security and Legal are different groups of people, and
its up to the customer to figure out how to navigate the
corporate org chart.
