Re: Cuervo, I disagree: ShareSniffer Released

Article View: comp.security.firewalls

Article #260

Back to comp.security.firewalls Previous Next

#260

From: Cuervo Jones
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 19:24

25 lines
3156 bytes

Here's my take on it...   It should only be offered as an optional service
that you have to give them permission to do...just like call blocking with
the phone company...  If they FORCE you to do it, they will severely
irritate a lot of people who need their connection to be fully open.  (Not
too mention the less they have to touch on their end configuration-wise, the
better it is for us...)  Being in the IT industry, I can appreciate both
sides of the coin, and filtering is usually NOT done by the people operating
the software...It's usually done by us IT losers...and of course we NEVER
communicate with them about specific needs they might have ;-)  hehe   It's
an important area of security, but toooooo many people have no clue about
it, and we don't need them sticking their hands in the cookie jar.  (as they
are the ones who usually do)    As far as Congress making it illegal to port
scan, I can't agree with that at all...  I have to port scan all the time
for troubleshooting purposes.  Anyone here ever talk to somebody the first
day they got Black Ice?  OH MY GOD I'M BEING HACKED!!!   (port scanning is
rampant, but just like any tool, it is the user using it that makes it seem
bad)  Scan responsibly people!  hehe

"Justin Emalius" <notta.name@notta.server.net> wrote in message
news:jtvl6.1306$aA5.364833@typhoon2.ba-dsg.net...
> I see nothing wrong with having my ISP/DSL provider acting to curb
malicious
> port scanners.  I'd also like the U.S. Congress to consider making port
> scanning a criminal act.
>

Technical Details

Message-ID: <VNyl6.3421$L04.381164@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail

References:

<3A966412.9336DCD8@mynetwatchman.com> <1orc9t0dblf72e35c9vvjj562kfff17vmm@can.gov> <OTul6.2816$L04.327284@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <jtvl6.1306$aA5.364833@typhoon2.ba-dsg.net>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f922c,b3c453f70036b961
X-Google-Attributes: gidf922c,public
X-Google-Thread: 113850,b3c453f70036b961
X-Google-Attributes: gid113850,public
X-Google-Thread: 10090f,b3c453f70036b961
X-Google-Attributes: gid10090f,public
X-Google-Thread: f5dc1,b3c453f70036b961
X-Google-Attributes: gidf5dc1,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-23 11:26:02 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Cuervo Jones" <cuervo_jones@altavista.com>
Newsgroups: comp.security.firewalls,bellsouth.net.security,comp.dcom.xdsl,comp.dcom.modems.cable
References: <3A966412.9336DCD8@mynetwatchman.com> <1orc9t0dblf72e35c9vvjj562kfff17vmm@can.gov> <OTul6.2816$L04.327284@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <jtvl6.1306$aA5.364833@typhoon2.ba-dsg.net>
Subject: Re: Cuervo, I disagree: ShareSniffer Released
Lines: 28
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Message-ID: <VNyl6.3421$L04.381164@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 19:24:37 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.173.30.5
X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net
X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 982956277 209.173.30.5 (Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:24:37 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:24:37 PST
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net

Reply to Parent Message