[47821] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dan Hollis)
Wed May 15 20:29:12 2002
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:28:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dan Hollis <goemon@anime.net>
To: PJ <briareos@otherlands.net>
Cc: Rob Thomas <robt@cymru.com>, NANOG <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20020516002239.GA1991@elvander.otherlands.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205151724190.1517-100000@sasami.anime.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, 15 May 2002, PJ wrote:
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Dan Hollis wrote:
> > We are not landmining for DOSing.
> > We are landmining to make it very dangerous for attackers to scan networks
> > and probe hosts.
> Are you now operating under the premise that scans != anything but the
> prelude to an attack? Sorry if I missed it earlier in the thread, but
> I would hate to think any legitimate scanning of a network or host
> would result in a false positive. Even more, I would hate to see the
> advocation of a hostile reaction to what, so far, is not considered a
> crime.
It would take more than a single landmine hit to get blackholed. Like, duh.
Enough hits on a wide sensor net prove bad intentions, as proven by dshield.
I'm suprised at the extremely shallow level of arguments so far against
landmines.
Well, I guess I shouldnt be suprised -- this *IS* nanog, after all... :P
-Dan
--
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
