North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical (fwd) Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product
Forgot to include nanog ----- Forwarded message from PJ <[email protected]> ----- > Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:50:01 -0700 > From: PJ <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product > To: Clayton Fiske <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Reply-To: PJ <[email protected]> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Clayton Fiske wrote: > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 05:22:39PM -0700, PJ wrote: > > > Are you now operating under the premise that scans != anything but the > > > prelude to an attack? Sorry if I missed it earlier in the thread, but > > > I would hate to think any legitimate scanning of a network or host > > > would result in a false positive. Even more, I would hate to see the > > > advocation of a hostile reaction to what, so far, is not considered a > > > crime. > > > > So you can think of a perfectly legitimate reason to scan someone else's > > netblocks on specific TCP ports? > > > > -c > > > > > > Has no one ever tested firewall rules from external networks? The > fact remains is that a scan != an attack. > > PJ > > -- > The worst thing one can do is not to try, to be aware of what one > wants and not give in to it, to spend years in silent hurt wondering > if something could have materialized -- and never knowing. > -- David Viscott
|