nanog mailing list archives
Re: Automatic abuse reports
From: joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 21:22:21 -0800
On Nov 12, 2013, at 9:16 PM, Brandon Galbraith <brandon.galbraith () gmail com> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:03 PM, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:Now it would be trivial to setup syslog and sshd to give only the sessions that complete the handshake, however I'm also not sure how responsive some of the abuse contacts may be. I'll keep my restrictive network settings for the time being.That's the main problem: you can generate the report but if it's about some doofus in Dubai what are the odds of it doing any good?And then we're right back to sending the offending packets to a black hole. *sigh*
a packet that you can drop quickly is a packet you don’t have to think about.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Current thread:
- Automatic abuse reports Jonas Björklund (Nov 12)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Sam Moats (Nov 12)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Daniël W . Crompton (Nov 12)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports William Herrin (Nov 12)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Sam Moats (Nov 12)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports William Herrin (Nov 12)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Brandon Galbraith (Nov 12)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports joel jaeggli (Nov 12)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Sam Moats (Nov 12)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Hal Murray (Nov 12)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Sam Moats (Nov 13)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Paul Bennett (Nov 13)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Sam Moats (Nov 13)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Jimmy Hess (Nov 13)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Sam Moats (Nov 13)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports Sam Moats (Nov 13)
- Re: Automatic abuse reports goemon (Nov 13)