Security Incidents mailing list archives
Re: No one wants responsibility
From: "Laumann, Dave" <dlaumann () SUNTZU NET>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:16:25 -0500
unfortunately, i've succumbed to blocking several networks at my border routers and am adding more on a regular basis. it is by far not the best solution but it does filter some of the noise. generally if the network owner or their upstream provider do not respond and their address block subjectively does not require access to our site... plonk. -dave
Sometimes the cracker can be also the admin or can have access to machine which receives the emails... This is something that you should consider very much, I saw this happening a lot.. As the provider is from Korea and you're (probably) far from there, you cannot do anything.. just trying to make a safer system and pray (so after you wont cry ;).A few days ago, I received a reply to an intrusion attemptreport that Isent to a Canadian ISP. He did not want any more reports(I have senttwo) as he did not have time and did not care about what his clients did. In browsing through the RR web pages I found that their AUPno longercontains any reference to hacking, cracking or other intrusions. Another report to a Korean bounced back. They post a contact e-mail address, but then never read their mail.
Current thread:
- No one wants responsibility Harlan S. Barney, Jr. (Sep 19)
- Re: No one wants responsibility UnixGeek (Sep 20)
- Re: No one wants responsibility Terje Bless (Sep 21)
- A port scan is not an Incident (was No one wants responsibility) Etaoin Shrdlu (Sep 20)
- Re: A port scan is not an Incident (was No one wants responsibility) Rob McCauley (Sep 21)
- Re: A port scan is not an Incident (was No one wants responsibility) David Brumley (Sep 21)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: No one wants responsibility Guilherme Mesquita (Sep 20)
- Re: No one wants responsibility Paul Franson (Sep 20)
- Re: No one wants responsibility Craven, William (Sep 20)
- Re: No one wants responsibility Laumann, Dave (Sep 21)
- Re: No one wants responsibility UnixGeek (Sep 20)