Re: Mutually Assured DDoS

["Tomas L. Byrnes" <tomb () byrneit net>]

You've got a point, if the botnet is truly third party, but if it is my
honeypots, or those of subscribers who are managed by my service and
give consent?



> -----Original Message-----
> From: funsec-bounces () linuxbox org [mailto:funsec-bounces () linuxbox org]
> On Behalf Of der Mouse
> Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2009 11:46 AM
> To: funsec () linuxbox org
> Subject: Re: [funsec] Mutually Assured DDoS
>
> > And I disagree that offense, especially as a counterpunch, is
> > something that is off-limit to respectable actors.  If I can detect
> > and own a botnet that is attacking me, and reverse it on its herders,
> > I think that is a highly respectable thing to do.
>
> I disagree.  Botnets are always (to a first and probably even second
> approximation) made up of machines belonging to arm's-length third
> parties, and you have no more right to abuse them for your ends than
> those abusing them to attack you do.
>
> /~\ The ASCII                            Mouse
> \ / Ribbon Campaign
> X  Against HTML               mouse () rodents-montreal org
> / \ Email!          7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
> _______________________________________________
> Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.