[70351] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Worms versus Bots
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris Woodfield)
Tue May 11 12:43:22 2004
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 12:41:31 -0400
From: Chris Woodfield <rekoil@semihuman.com>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>, Michael.Dillon@radianz.com,
nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <200405111621.i4BGLTe7008562@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--GZVR6ND4mMseVXL/
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Simple solution...build the on-NIC firewall to not use uPnP, or at least re=
quire=20
a password before changing rulesets. :)
Seriously, this is such a stupidly simple solution that I'm amazed no one's=
attempted=20
to make a product out of it yet.=20
-C
On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 12:21:29PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:38:33 EDT, Chris Woodfield said:
>=20
> > A better solution would be a NIC with a built-in SI firewall...manageab=
le from a host
> > app, but physically separate from the OS running on the PC.
>=20
> Gaak. No. ;)
>=20
> What's the point of a firewall, if the first piece of malware that does m=
anage
> to sneak in (via a file-sharing program, or a webpage that installs malwa=
re, or
> an "ooh! Shiny!" email attachment) just does the network Plug-N-Play call=
to
> tell the firewall "Shield DOWN!"?
>=20
--GZVR6ND4mMseVXL/
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAoQI6qP/YiunDNcERAqoGAJ0XckD3DAlif75Ay4g8G284hNmWsACeLTt2
r88u8pSafJ+gMy5e0eHDHGE=
=RFmT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--GZVR6ND4mMseVXL/--
