nanog mailing list archives
Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack
From: Donovan Hill <lists () lazyeyez net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:56:02 -0800
On Friday 30 January 2004 04:39 pm, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 04:18:05PM -0800, Donovan Hill
wrote:
I think we should help out SCO by creating new wildcard entries into our DNS servers that point *.sco.com to 127.0.0.1 as well as blackholing all SCO SWIPd IP Address Space.I'm going to be one of the last people who will defend SCO recent actions. However, as much as I hate, and hate is the word, SCO I feel the need to speak up after your comments. Bruce Perens has said it far better than I ever could at http://perens.com/SCO/DOS/. Please read what he has to say. We (Open Source, ISPs, etc) must, MUST, come to SCO's defense on this one. I am doing what I can with my employer to do just that. Allowing attacks like this to succeed, either directly or indirectly is far more harmful than allowing SCO to stay online. We cannot condone these actions for any reason, the end does not justify the means in the case of worms.
Please don't misunderstand me. I in no way condone or encourage DoS attacking SCO/Caldera (or anyone for that matter). To my mind, that'd be like encouraging one group of people to attack another group of people for any reason. It's certainly not acceptable. My comments were meant in partial jest and partial frustration. Jest as a solution to the pending DDOS and frustration that SCO will spin this as an attack by the Linux community against SCO, which it is not. I apologize if I didn't make that clear. For the record, I fully believe that this worm (both variants) is designed to attack high profile targets in order to take the focus off of it's spamming capability and create uncertainty as to what group actually authored the worm. It is my firm belief that this worm was written by spammers for the purpose creating spam relays. Also, for the record, I believe everyone has the right to say what they will regardless of legitimacy, and this does include SCO. Again, I apologize if I gave the wrong impression that the pending DDOS attack on SCO was a good thing. It's not. -- Donovan Hill Electronics Engineering Technologist, CCNA www.lazyeyez.net, www.gwsn.com
Current thread:
- Impending (mydoom) DOS attack bcm (Jan 30)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Chris Behrens (Jan 30)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Leo Bicknell (Jan 30)
- Lack of Info (was Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack) Sean Donelan (Jan 30)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Mike Tancsa (Jan 30)
- MyDoom statistics (was Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack) Sean Donelan (Jan 30)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Donovan Hill (Jan 30)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Leo Bicknell (Jan 30)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. (Jan 30)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Donovan Hill (Jan 30)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Stephen J. Wilcox (Jan 31)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 31)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. (Jan 31)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Leo Bicknell (Jan 30)
- Re: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack Mikael Abrahamsson (Jan 30)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Fw: Impending (mydoom) DOS attack james (Jan 30)