Security Incidents mailing list archives
@home: Is *anyone* really home there??? (fwd)
From: measl () MFN ORG (Light Of Day)
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 03:04:31 -0600
As many of you will remember, this thread began on Feb 22, with our site being actively attacked by some script kiddie at @home for *hours* on end. Today is March 4th (11 days later), and we have had incidents with this same @home skript-subscriber (24.15.162.239) virtually every day since the 22nd, *and have complained EVERY frigging day since the 22nd (with logs), and *still* nothing has been done other than an autoresponse to each complaint. The point is that those posters who are asserting that lack of response!=lack of action *obviously* do not know @home... With this type of "security stance" from @home, maybe it would be better to just blackhole the entire domain from *everyones* routers: think about it: it may be the _only_ safe option when dealing with @home packets... Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin () mfn org ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 16:43:30 -0600 (CST) From: Missouri FreeNet Administration <measl () mfn org> To: incidents () securityfocus com Subject: @home: Is *anyone* really home there??? Greetings, If there are any *living breathing* @home abuse admins on this list, would one of you please contact me regarding one of your lusers? The customer at 24.15.162.239 has been attempting to penetrate our perimeter net for almost 4 hours straight now, and it's getting really *OLD*... (Yes, they have been cut off at the routers, but I still have to sift through 4 hours of continuous log activity I'd rather not deal with - and they show *no* signs of catching an errant clue any time soon). Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin () mfn org -- If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- Re: auto-reporting to ISPs, (continued)
- Re: auto-reporting to ISPs Network Operations (Mar 02)
- Re: auto-reporting to ISPs Greg A. Woods (Mar 02)
- Re: auto-reporting to ISPs Rasmus Andersson (Mar 02)
- CNET Hackers hit e-commerce site Vincent Lee (Mar 02)
- UDP Probes (?) from port 28432 to 28431 ? Xander Jansen (Mar 04)
- Re: UDP Probes (?) from port 28432 to 28431 ? Alexander Schreiber (Mar 07)
- UDP Probes (?) from port 28432 to 28431 ? Klaus Moeller (Mar 07)
- Re: UDP Probes (?) from port 28432 to 28431 ? Xander Jansen (Mar 09)
- Re: CNET Hackers hit e-commerce site Chris Davis (Mar 04)
- Port 65535 Murray, Mike (Mar 02)
- @home: Is *anyone* really home there??? (fwd) Light Of Day (Mar 04)
- Re: Port 65535 Pavel Kankovsky (Mar 04)
- Re: Port 65535 Murray, Mike (Mar 04)
- Re: Port 65535 Richard Bejtlich (Mar 04)
- Re: Port 65535 Keith Pachulski (Mar 06)
- Re: auto-reporting to ISPs wozz () LUVEWE BONCH ORG (Mar 02)
- Re: auto-reporting to ISPs Stuart Staniford-Chen (Mar 06)