North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Network Operators and smurf

  • From: Phil Howard
  • Date: Sun Apr 26 17:01:33 1998

[email protected] writes...

> It would prevent simple spoofing, yes, but that would not
> eliminate the Smurf attacks since to mount a Smurf attack you
> need to use the victim's address as your source address, and that
> one *is* typically "valid" according to the criteria you mention
> above (?).

But the first router the spoofer hits would NOT likely point the spoofed
address back to the spoofer.  At that router this would stop the spoof.
This is why the feature needs to be shipped on all routers and enabled
by default.

Phil Howard | [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
  phil      | [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
    at      | [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
  milepost  | [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
    dot     | [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
  com       | [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]