North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Open Letter to D-Link about their NTP vandalism
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Paul Vixie wrote: > [email protected] (Simon Lyall) writes: > > > I've said in other forums the only solution for this sort of software is > > to return the wrong time (by several months). The owner might actually > > notice then and fix the problem. > > that creates new liability, and isn't realistic in today's litigious world. Everyone here runs spam filters. Many times a day you tell a remote MTA you've accepted their email but you delete it instead. Explain the difference? I run a NTP server, The only place it is advertised is a list which says "To be used by people in DK exchange only" . Explain the difference between my blocking someones packets (which causes them to just resend), send a KOD ( ntp for "go away") packet (which is ignored) and telling them the time is "2001-11-11 11:11:11" every time they ask? People running RBLs change the access policy or return 127.0.0.1 for every query sometimes. People running public Mail relays or public DNS servers regularly block access or return bad results. NTP provides a method to tell people to go away (The KOD packet) , if a remote client ignores that and keeps flooding your (or your upstream filters) with many udp packets per-second what exactly is someone supposed to do? There is no contract between the Server operator and the abusing client, The client is abusing the access policy and they have ignored the automatic request to go away. -- Simon J. Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.