nanog mailing list archives
Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445
From: My Name <routerg () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 14:13:36 -0400
On 8/18/05, Roger Marquis <marquis () roble com> wrote:
Andy Johnson wrote:I think the point of many on this list is, they are a transit provider, not a security provider. They should not need to filter your traffic, that should be up to the end user/edge network to decide for themselves.How is this different from a transit provider allowing their network to be used for spam? Seems the same hands-off argument was made wrt spam a decade ago but has since proved unsustainable.
This is where the abuse teams at the service providers need to have management approved thresholds for different types of abuse and be empowered to take action. If your customer is caught port scanning (hacking, worm propogation, etc) twice within a two day time frame or something, the abuse team should be able to null route/filter the ports without further warning. If they are spamming and after repeat notifications they do not stop, have an escalation process that goes from suspension to termination of service. There are plenty of automated complaint scripts out there for all types of abuse, so you don't have to look at everything yourself.
Our particular problem is with an ISP in Wisconsin, NETNET-WAN. We get tens of thousands of scans to netbios ports every day from their /19. This is several orders of magnitude more netbios than we see from the rest of the net combined. It's eating nontrivial bandwidth and cpu that we pay real money for. They've had our logs for months but seem incapable of doing anything about their infected customers. The suits recommend documenting time and bandwidth costs and sending a bill with a cease and desist request. My question is not what can we do about bots, we already filter these worst case networks, but what can we do to make it worthwhile for bot-providers like NETNET to police their own networks without involving lawyers? -- Roger Marquis Roble Systems Consulting http://www.roble.com/
Current thread:
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445, (continued)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 MARLON BORBA (Aug 16)
- RE: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Church, Chuck (Aug 16)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Valdis . Kletnieks (Aug 16)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Christopher L. Morrow (Aug 16)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Sean Donelan (Aug 16)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Valdis . Kletnieks (Aug 16)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Fergie (Paul Ferguson) (Aug 17)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Roger Marquis (Aug 18)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Bill Nash (Aug 18)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Andy Johnson (Aug 18)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 Peter Dambier (Aug 18)
- Re: zotob - blocking tcp/445 My Name (Aug 18)