🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9d6bit$ooh$1@caerulus.cerintha.com>,
Michael Scheidell <scheidell@fdma.com> wrote:
>Ah, if the isp's only took the mynetwatchman.com alerts more seriously!

We took them quite seriously.  But there's not much you can do to prevent a
DoS attack, all you can do is wait for it to happen and then try to filter
it.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net
Genuity, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.

On Mon, 07 May 2001 14:54:43 GMT, Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.net>
wrote:
>In article <9d6bit$ooh$1@caerulus.cerintha.com>,
>Michael Scheidell <scheidell@fdma.com> wrote:
>>Ah, if the isp's only took the mynetwatchman.com alerts more seriously!
>
>We took them quite seriously.  But there's not much you can do to
>prevent a DoS attack, all you can do is wait for it to happen and then
>try to filter it.

Preventive maintenance: get the cracked boxes that are constantly
scanning off the network. And don't take weeks/months to do it. (I 
don't mean you guys specifically, just those who are lethargic like 
BellSouth.)

-- 
Hal B
 hal@foobox.net
 hal@burgiss.net
 hburgiss@bellsouth.net
 Spamtrap: uce@ftc.gov and report@fraud.org
--

In <9d6bit$ooh$1@caerulus.cerintha.com> "Michael Scheidell" <me2@privacy.net> writes:

Lets, see the following set of sentences.

]Chinese hackers have broken into dozens of small computers, unprotected

...
]The FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Centre said Chinese hackers had
]publicly discussed increasing their activity with May 7, the second
...
]last night had shut down six of them. The identity and whereabouts of the
]hackers using those servers is not known."


So, the hackers are unknown but are "Known" to be Chinese? What kind of
jingoistic nonsense is this?

Michael Scheidell <scheidell@fdma.com> wrote:
> Chinese hackers have broken into dozens of small computers, unprotected
> linux boxes, windows boxes, proxy servers and routers and have launched a
> Distributed Denial of service attack on CNN, Whitehouse.gov, nasa new your
> times and others (I think I hear that GRC.com and zonealarm's web sites
> were under attack also)

Ah, I see what they're doing: (1) Report that you have successfully launched
a denial-of-service attack. (2) Sit back and watch as everyone within
hearing range tries the site to see if it's true.

miguel

In article <9d6jls$1k7$1@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca>,
Bill Unruh <unruh@physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
>In <9d6bit$ooh$1@caerulus.cerintha.com> "Michael Scheidell"
><me2@privacy.net> writes:
>
>Lets, see the following set of sentences.
>
>]Chinese hackers have broken into dozens of small computers, unprotected
>
>...
>]The FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Centre said Chinese hackers had
>]publicly discussed increasing their activity with May 7, the second
>...
>]last night had shut down six of them. The identity and whereabouts of the
>]hackers using those servers is not known."
>
>
>So, the hackers are unknown but are "Known" to be Chinese? What kind of
>jingoistic nonsense is this?

What's so hard to understand?  The Chinese cracker community let out the
word that they were planning an attack, in comemmoration of a date of
significance in Sino-American relations.  But we don't know the individuals
involved, just that they're members of this community.  It's not jingoism,
just limited information.

This is not much different from what it would be like if a terrorist leader
called for an increase in terrorist activity on a specific day.  The CIA
would know to be on the lookout for hijackings, bombings, etc. on that day,
but we wouldn't know which individuals were the terrorists.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net
Genuity, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.

March 17, 2005
Today, a bill reached the floor of the U.S. House
of Representatives that would hold computer owners
responsible for DDoS attacks...  it was stated that
ignorance about computer security will no longer
be considered an acceptable excuse...

... a $1,000.00 fine will be levied against owners
of *unprotected Internet connected devices
that were hacked into and used as part of a DDoS.


*Unprotected - you did not implement known,
reasonable precautions to protect your
Internet connected devices from intruders.

In article <8XAJ6.11$Bv4.830@burlma1-snr2>, Barry Margolin wrote:
>In article <9d6jls$1k7$1@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca>,
>Bill Unruh <unruh@physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
>>In <9d6bit$ooh$1@caerulus.cerintha.com> "Michael Scheidell"
>><me2@privacy.net> writes:
>>
>>Lets, see the following set of sentences.
>>
>>]Chinese hackers have broken into dozens of small computers, unprotected
[-]
Those are a general, not a Chinese hacker problem, sure thing.

>>...
>>]The FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Centre said Chinese hackers had
>>]publicly discussed increasing their activity with May 7, the second
>>...
>>]last night had shut down six of them. The identity and whereabouts of the
>>]hackers using those servers is not known."
>>
>>
>>So, the hackers are unknown but are "Known" to be Chinese? What kind of
>>jingoistic nonsense is this?
>
>What's so hard to understand?  The Chinese cracker community let out the
>word that they were planning an attack, in comemmoration of a date of
>significance in Sino-American relations.  But we don't know the individuals
>involved, just that they're members of this community.  It's not jingoism,
>just limited information.
[-]
As a non US citizen ... is it possible that all the talk about "The Chinese
bringing the world to a grinding halt" caused some, Chinese or not Chinese
or half Chinese half something else, clowns to, aehm, try ?

And did actually something significant happen ? I mean if they'd brought
down 50% of all adult sites, oh my, that would have been something, but
else ?

Just checking as quite a fuss has been made about all that and some German
sites at least had to go off the hook for a while, too. Still mostly business
as usual AFAICT.

Happy hacking,
Juergen

-- 
\ Real name     : Juergen Heinzl                \       no flames      /
 \ EMail Private : juergen@monocerus.demon.co.uk \ send money instead /

JR <johnnyrNOSPAM@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> March 17, 2005 Today, a bill reached the floor of the U.S. House of
> Representatives that would hold computer owners responsible for DDoS
> attacks...  it was stated that ignorance about computer security will no
> longer be considered an acceptable excuse...

How much do you suppose it will cost Symantec to get that passed?

miguel

In article <slrn9fdoml.cu.juergen@monocerus.demon.co.uk>,
Juergen Heinzl <juergen@monocerus.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>And did actually something significant happen ? I mean if they'd brought
>down 50% of all adult sites, oh my, that would have been something, but
>else ?

Yes, there was a DoS attack on whitehouse.gov on Friday (I don't know
offhand about any of the other sites that the OP mentioned).  Several of
our people spent most of the day fending them off.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net
Genuity, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.

In article <VLBJ6.15$Bv4.912@burlma1-snr2>, Barry Margolin wrote:
>In article <slrn9fdoml.cu.juergen@monocerus.demon.co.uk>,
>Juergen Heinzl <juergen@monocerus.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>And did actually something significant happen ? I mean if they'd brought
>>down 50% of all adult sites, oh my, that would have been something, but
>>else ?
>
>Yes, there was a DoS attack on whitehouse.gov on Friday (I don't know
>offhand about any of the other sites that the OP mentioned).  Several of
>our people spent most of the day fending them off.
[-]
I know about that one, but did not consider it significant to be
honest. More of symbolic value, never mind ;-)

Some defaced WWW sites, too, yep, so mostly fun stuff at the end of
the day, nothing really impressive,
Juergen

-- 
\ Real name     : Juergen Heinzl                \       no flames      /
 \ EMail Private : juergen@monocerus.demon.co.uk \ send money instead /

In article <9d6jls$1k7$1@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca>, unruh@physics.ubc.ca
(Bill Unruh) wrote:
> 
> 
> So, the hackers are unknown but are "Known" to be Chinese? What kind of
> jingoistic nonsense is this?

It maybe true or not. Half-truths and out and out lies are often the basis
of propaganda.  A smart hacker might just direct blame to a particular
group to take the interest off his trail.  Or, it might be an act of
supreme stupidity to have supplies the details of viruses, etc., to the
Chinese.  

In any regard, internet insecurity is again demonstrated.  It does not
have to be that way.  It must change by basic design, not by mallet waving
madmen who tout themselves as experts ready to stamp their feet and charge
exorbitant fees.
-- 
Mother Nature always gets her revenge. 

"Michael Scheidell" <me2@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:9d6bit$ooh$1@caerulus.cerintha.com...

> Ah, if the isp's only took the mynetwatchman.com alerts more seriously!
>

Well planned, orchestrated attacks. What gifts have been left behind?

Adam Warlock
http://www.unclenet.org

On Tue, 08 May 2001 05:10:12 GMT, "Adam Warlock" <ddejohne@san.rr.com>
wrote:

>"Michael Scheidell" <me2@privacy.net> wrote in message
>news:9d6bit$ooh$1@caerulus.cerintha.com...
>
>> Ah, if the isp's only took the mynetwatchman.com alerts more seriously!
>>
>
>Well planned, orchestrated attacks. What gifts have been left behind?

Speaking of attacks, anyone know if that is what has been going on
with Yahoo lately?  

And is someone hacking DNS servers or routers?  There is something
wrong with the path between me and both Yahoo and Topica (and nowhere
else), and it started a week ago... about when all this talk of
attacks from the Chinese started.  I'm getting nowhere with Yahoo or
Topica.  


Paul Goelz
pgoelz at eaglequest dot com
Videoastronomy, music and model helicopter website:
http://www.eaglequest.com/~pgoelz

In article <5jvfftk6dilfat1mgaqsfn6njiutm51svn@news.sonic.net>,
Jester �  <Jester's Cat.> wrote:
>I am a genuity customer and have seen time and time again, genuity ip's showing
>up in my firewall logs, further checking reveals these boxes to be wide open
>servers being operated by adsl customers, sending reports to security does not
>seem to be getting these boxes either secured or shut down, because they are
>seen a few days later involved in more port scans, if security would take the
>pro-active approach and shut these boxes down that would be one less launching
>point these idiots could be exploiting.

I'm not very familiar with our ADSL business, but we we don't sell ADSL
directly to consumers.  We mostly sell wholesale services to resellers, so
I think that all we can do with complaints like this is forward them to the
appropriate reseller.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net
Genuity, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.

Are they going to fine whitehouse.gov $1,000?

Paul W <paulw7.nospam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:hgpdftgj2gll0ksdepno13kr2jh9dq7uke@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 7 May 2001 13:46:26 -0400, "JR" <johnnyrNOSPAM@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
>
> >March 17, 2005
> >Today, a bill reached the floor of the U.S. House
> >of Representatives that would hold computer owners
> >responsible for DDoS attacks...  it was stated that
> >ignorance about computer security will no longer
> >be considered an acceptable excuse...
> >
> >... a $1,000.00 fine will be levied against owners
> >of *unprotected Internet connected devices
> >that were hacked into and used as part of a DDoS.
> >
> >
> >*Unprotected - you did not implement known,
> >reasonable precautions to protect your
> >Internet connected devices from intruders.
> >
> >
>
> March 17, 2005, still a long time to think about it.  :o)
>