Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
Hi,
you probably didnt think of this but it might not be a good idea to publish a
list of 3000 computers than can be infected/taken over for further nastiness.
Collecting that kind of list on any machine on the public internet takes
only a day or so, so I don't think
Bill Nash wrote:
Various persons put forth some amount of effort to, graciously, give
other operators a heads up to the ongoing/potential abuse of their
networks, and you're concerned about topical relevance? Why aren't you,
Aside to if botnet issues were discussed here, it would flood the list
-Original Message-
From: Bill Nash [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 3:31 AM
To: Hannigan, Martin
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: IRC Bot list (cross posting)
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
[ snip ]
Various persons put forth some
On 02/09/05, Bill Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And I'm not subscribed to either. Yet, I've no less than a /19 of space
under my purview and I don't believe that publishing botnet lists in the
manner that has been done is either off topic, or off charter. Some of us,
as hosting providers
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 12:11:16 GMT, Ketil Froyn said:
http://www.albany.edu/~ja6447/hacked_bots8.txt
Isn't it a good idea to collect the IP addresses rather than the ptr
name? For instance, if I were an evil person in control of the ptr
record of my own IP, I could easily make the name
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
out botnet lists to NANOG, fine by me. I never said I can
stop them. I just said I didn't want them as a subscriber.
I understand that you don't know where these existing
lists are. Look hard. If you suddenly care about bots
enough in the last 24 hours
--On Wednesday, February 09, 2005 11:28 +0200 Gadi Evron
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is it a bad idea then? Because not all of us are Bill Nash who won't
pwn a user.
The same can easily be said for ANY public forum.
I'm surprised to have not heard anyone mention this
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-07feb05.htm
- ferg
--
Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
Engineering Architecture for the Internet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why is it a bad idea then? Because not all of us are Bill Nash who won't
pwn a user.
The same can easily be said for ANY public forum.
Yes.
There's TWO places that are doing this botnet stuff and
the NANOG AUP discourages cross posting.
I for one certainly don't want yet another list full of
botnet stuff.
And I'm not subscribed to either. Yet, I've no less than a /19 of space
under my purview and I don't believe that
At 5:30 PM + 05/2/9, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
I'm surprised to have not heard anyone mention this
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-07feb05.htm
I'm surprised that SAIC has been given another opportunity to
negatively impact the internet.
From
Can any
networkengineer from the Savvis network please contact me
off-line.
Kind
Regards,
Ken Williams Network Security Engineer Sony Pictures Digital Entertainment
That's lovely: 72.29.160.0/20 was lent to us by ARIN just last week so
we're in the same boat.
-jr
* Bryan Bradsby [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20050119 19:28]:
Our NOC is opening a lot of tickets for customers that live on our
72.14.128.0/19 network going towards local and federal government
[ Edited and resent, the first appears to have vanished in transit ]
I concede the point that operational tracking of botnets doesn't belong here,
and I offer apologies to Martin, and the list in general, for not
counting to ten before replying to his email. However, simply suppressing
On Wed, 2005-02-09 at 22:04 -0800, Bill Nash wrote:
Moving to a more productive stance for this thread:
How many people have subbed in the past month? The past year? There's
stuff in the FAQ about what's directly relevent to this particular list,
but there are a million related sub-topics
15 matches
Mail list logo
