^^ come down..

maybe check your server first .. seems a little vulnerable ;)

btw.. whats your servers domain?

mit freundlichen Grüßen / best regards,

F Kron - edv dienstschiene
Mobile:  +43 699 19000414
Mail: [email protected]

On Sep 4, 2012, at 12:50 AM, Marco Cirillo <[email protected]> wrote:

> Il 03/09/2012 22:41, Arsimael Inshan ha scritto:
>> I don't think thats a good idea. Every open Jabber-Server can be used for 
>> this. IF you block all Open Servers, then you might cut yourself of the 
>> jabber network. And if everyone does this then we don't have a jabber 
>> network anymore, or it's getting an invite-only system. You shouldn't punish 
>> the servers (or the owners of those). They provide a free service, and I 
>> don't think everyone has the time to watch about how many users are 
>> registering accounts on them.
>> 
>> We should ask the server-developers to implement a feature which allows us 
>> to configure how many messages are going to be sent to one muc/JID in an 
>> defined amount of time. Maybe 5 Messages/sec? 
>> 
>> Am 03.09.2012 19:29, schrieb Thomas:
>>> Hi,
>>> these server list are now a bloack list in my server
>>> 
>>>> Marco Cirillo      03 settembre 2012 16:37
>>>> Approximately from 8:50 am to 8:56 am UTC, my server's muc received 
>>>> something like 1.7 millions stanzas from drones spread across 54 servers. 
>>>> 
>>>> [email protected]/Mcabber, formally "the idiot", did survey the room 
>>>> and remained in there while the attack was having place. 
>>>> 
>>>> This is the list of servers is the following: 
>>>> jabber.fds-net.ru 
>>>> jabber.justlan.ru 
>>>> zsh.su 
>>>> vzljot.ru 
>>>> kdetalk.net 
>>>> jabber.nostra.by 
>>>> jabber.icequake.net 
>>>> logan-club.ru 
>>>> jabber.kirovnet.ru 
>>>> linux.pl 
>>>> movsoftware.com 
>>>> jaim.at 
>>>> jabber.xs4all.nl 
>>>> oneteam.im 
>>>> jabber.workaround.org 
>>>> stopicq.ru 
>>>> jabber.ofmycity.com 
>>>> tronet.ru 
>>>> jabbernet.dk 
>>>> zlug.asia 
>>>> jabber.tmkis.com 
>>>> jabber.typhon.net 
>>>> jabber.postel.org 
>>>> fritalk.org 
>>>> xmpp.us 
>>>> jabber.uruchie.org 
>>>> im.apinc.org 
>>>> jabber.belnet.be 
>>>> izhnet.org 
>>>> akl.lt 
>>>> jabber.psg.com 
>>>> jabnet.org 
>>>> jabber80.com 
>>>> jabber.crimea.ua 
>>>> kamp.pl 
>>>> jabber.dn.ua 
>>>> debianforum.de 
>>>> jabber.berlin.ccc.de 
>>>> jab.nazarovo-tel.ru 
>>>> jabber.murom.net 
>>>> jabber.meta.net.nz 
>>>> thesecure.biz 
>>>> jabber.netrusk.net 
>>>> alpha-labs.net 
>>>> jabberworld.net 
>>>> swissjabber.de 
>>>> scirus.benran.ru 
>>>> jwchat.org 
>>>> jabber.stream.uz 
>>>> eter.asia 
>>>> jabber.rdtc.ru 
>>>> draugr.de 
>>>> talkers.im 
>>>> jabber.lg.ua 
>>>> tsu.tmb.ru 
>>>> jabber.tanet.ru 
>>>> jabber.freenet.de 
>>>> 
>>>> While the above servers have been filtered from accessing components, 
>>>> jabberworld.net has been hex-listed. 
>>>> 
>>>> I do highly encourage the administrators of the servers into the list (if 
>>>> they're subscribed) to employ more rigid safety precautions regarding IBR 
>>>> and monitor more actively what happens in there, so that, excuse the 
>>>> frankness, we don't have to deal with this trash. 
>>>> 
>>>> Best Regards, 
>>>> Marco Cirillo. 
>>>> 
>> 
> Not every "open" xmpp server "can be used for this" just the loosely watched 
> and unsecure ones and no one forces you to federate a server which allows 
> users to register but if you want to, at least, employ reasonably safe 
> practices to prevent automated registration.
> 
> And I also disagree on the: << You shouldn't punish the servers (or the 
> owners of those). They provide a free service, and I don't think everyone has 
> the time to watch about how many users are registering accounts on them. >>
> Infact you really _should_ punish the servers and its owners. XMPP 
> Architecture's for what regards federation puts servers as the intermediate 
> entity between users, and that means that in the majority of cases I can't 
> track back directly to the (malicious) user without inquirying the involved 
> server's administrator and that raises the actual responsibility of the 
> "owner" by quite a while since it's their server which, like in this case, is 
> being used as vehicle for the attack.
> 
> So as stated above no one forces you to host a public server but if you do 
> you are, in my opinion, imposed to take an adeguate care of it, because 
> likewise "no one forces me to deal with your junk" and that also means 
> "pretty palisades will be built" to prevent "your junk" passing through.
> 
> Regards,
> Marco.




Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to