[60259] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: WANTED: ISPs with DDoS defense solutions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher L. Morrow)
Tue Aug 5 00:07:44 2003
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 04:07:05 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <chris@UU.NET>
To: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
Cc: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, bdragon@gweep.net, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <3F2ED759.7000202@brightok.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Jack Bates wrote:
>
> Randy Bush wrote:
> >>anti-spoofing eliminates certain avenues of attack allowing one to focus
> >>on remaining avenues, and hence (as Vix stated) is necessary but not
> >>sufficient.
> >
> >
> > it turns 1% of the technical problem into a massive social business
> > problem which, even if it was solvable (which it practically isn't),
> > would also be addressed by technical solutions where no spoofing is
> > involved.
> >
> Spoofed packets are harder to trace to the source than non-spoofed
> packets. Knowing where a malicious packet is very important to the
this is patently incorrect: www.secsup.org/Tracking/ has some information
you might want to review. Tracking spoofed attacks is infact EASIER than
non-spoofed attacks, especially if your network has a large 'edge'.
