On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:48:40 -0800 (PST), Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From what I understand the answer is no. People I know who have attended
> asia-pacific regional network meetings described them as "clueless".
> Unfortunately the same goes for kornet. :-/
If anybody here is attend
Chances are that the Sendmail team doesn't share your worm problems as most
of them are not likely running unpatched windows boxes.
Owen
pgpXFCaZUIc43.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Can a real, live human being from Inktomi please ping me offline wrt a
phishing site on your network?
-J
--
Jeff Workman | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http:/www.pimpworks.org
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Dave O'Shea wrote:
> They do have people in an LA office, as I got a call
> from one of them when I had a BGP session to them go
> down due to a max-prefix which had been exceeded.
>
> I guess if you have three times the population of the
> US, you're going to have one or t
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Gadi Evron wrote:
> It would still be my guess there are more black hats in the US.
yahoo and hotmail come close, but it will take some real balls to top
chinanet's official blackhat lying autoresponder:
"In your SPAM eMail,I can't find the IP or the IP is not by my
contro
Yo Vladis!
Those of us who have *enough* trouble keeping our own broadband users
zombie-free should be glad we're not the Korean CIRT staff. *THEY* got
handed an entire *COUNTRY* full of clueless users on high-speed connections.
Indeed, KrCERT is doing a very good job at cluing KR. They are very g
Dave O'Shea wrote:
They do have people in an LA office, as I got a call
from one of them when I had a BGP session to them go
down due to a max-prefix which had been exceeded.
I guess if you have three times the population of the
US, you're going to have one or two "black hats".
Undoubtedly.
It woul
Hi Jon,
there were two guys at nanog33.. if you didnt meet them then perhaps keep an
eye out at nanog34
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0501/attendee.list.html
short answer is i see chinanet folks on a whole bunch of forums and lists,
Steve
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Jon R. Kibler wrote:
> I know that t
They do have people in an LA office, as I got a call
from one of them when I had a BGP session to them go
down due to a max-prefix which had been exceeded.
I guess if you have three times the population of the
US, you're going to have one or two "black hats".
--- Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Scott Weeks wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Gadi Evron wrote:
: want to see at this headache of a position, or we do it openly on the
Yes, publically. Please.
Publically - on NANOG itself, please.
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:48:40 -0800 (PST), Dan Hollis wrote:
> >From what I understand the answer is no. People I know who have attended
> asia-pacific regional network meetings described them as "clueless".
As of this past Summer, this was no longer true for all of China Telecom. In
fact they
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Gadi Evron wrote:
: want to see at this headache of a position, or we do it openly on the
Yes, publically. Please.
scott
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Richard Cox wrote:
:
: On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:13:07 -0500
: "Jon R. Kibler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:
: > I know that this is a REALLY sore point, but has anyone ever
: > established any good working relations with anyone in CHINANET
: > or other China-based ISPs?
:
: Ye
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 14:09:58 EST, "Hannigan, Martin" said:
> I wouldn't go as far as label it systemic. Both Chinese and
> Korean organizations are participating in some of the behind
> the scenes security/mitigation activities going on and have been
> helpful. Not all. Some.
Yes, however the cl
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
> I wouldn't go as far as label it systemic. Both Chinese and
> Korean organizations are participating in some of the behind
> the scenes security/mitigation activities going on and have been
> helpful. Not all. Some.
Remember that chinanet was the on
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Dan Hollis wrote:
From what I understand the answer is no. People I know who have attended
asia-pacific regional network meetings described them as "clueless".
Unfortunately the same goes for kornet. :-/
Clueless?
Which is worse, ignorance or entropy?
Who knows? Who cares?
(an
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Richard Cox
> Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 2:01 PM
> To: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: Re: ChinaNet Contacts
>
>
>
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:13:07 -0500
> "Jon R. Kibler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:13:07 -0500
"Jon R. Kibler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know that this is a REALLY sore point, but has anyone ever
> established any good working relations with anyone in CHINANET
> or other China-based ISPs?
Yes, indeed. And been out to Beijing to have meetings with t
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Jon R. Kibler wrote:
> I know that this is a REALLY sore point, but has anyone ever
> established any good working relations with anyone in CHINANET or other
> China-based ISPs?
>From what I understand the answer is no. People I know who have attended
asia-pacific regiona
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Jon R. Kibler wrote:
better still, has anyone ever come up with a bgp-distributed list of
prefixes that trace back to such addresses?
-Dan
--
"Ca. Tas. Tro. Phy."
-John Smedley, March 28th 1998, 3AM
Dan Mahoney
Techie, Sysadmin, WebGeek
Gushi on efnet/undern
>(two providers) I called Vonage tech support who have recommended
>a comprehensive channel test
Wow! You got someone on the phone!
> (using a utility they recommend)
I'd be interested, even though my Vonage ATA is about to go back. Tnx.
Regards,
John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perp
Update:
ChoicePoint's problem could affect up to 400,000 now.
Identity Theft Bigger Than First Thought:
http://www.wgst.com/cc-common/local_news_common.html?
ID=20050217034315&feed=local
-Jim P.
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 20:15 +, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
>
> Yes, this _is_ much worse. :
I know that this is a REALLY sore point, but has anyone ever established any
good working relations with anyone in CHINANET or other China-based ISPs?
In recent weeks, over 80% of our port scans and various miscreant probes have
originated from a very small number of IPs in China. Trying to con
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:16:37 +, Martin Hepworth wrote:
> I've rename MHS to MTA (mail transport agent) which is the proper
> technical term. I guess there's a reason why you didn't use MTA?
Needed an additional term:
> Abstract
>
> ... and the transmission world, in the form of the Mail
Dave Crocker wrote:
Folks,
I've been working on an email architecture document, prompted by the increased
diversity of folk who are trying to enhance the service, to mitigate minor
problems like spam. I think the document has reached a stable point, in its
attempt to describe the current servic
Folks,
I've been working on an email architecture document, prompted by the increased
diversity of folk who are trying to enhance the service, to mitigate minor
problems like spam. I think the document has reached a stable point, in its
attempt to describe the current service. I'd like to ge
something has to be arbitrary in the absence of a government, its a chicken and
egg. i think you're looking for problems that arent there - do you or anyone
have issue with the progress thus far? if not the question is moot.
My question was answered. The current "government" which was not "chose
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Gadi Evron wrote:
> Perfect, but let's not repeat past mistakes.
>
> Let's set a date for this "temporary government" to expire, and start
> discussing how the process of a more permanent "governing" body will be
> achieved. I think 3 months is the longest we should decide o
Hi everyone - apologies for a rather long message, but I wanted to
bring you up-to-date on some steps the Program Committee and Merit
have taken to evolve NANOG since our community meeting in Las Vegas.
*Many thanks* to those of you who attended and gave us feedback - we
learned a lot and look
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Um, you actually have to work somewhat to get sendmail to support
> > unauthenticated submission on port 587. The default configuration
> > is that port 25 is unauthenticated (albeit with some restrictions
> > on relaying (only for local clients))
Speaking only for myself (and certainly not for Merit):
The NANOG Reform group (http://www.nanog-reform.org), which has already
gone on record supporting an open and democratic NANOG, was asked for
volunteers. I think all three of us are looking at this as a temporary
assignment until the broader
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Gadi Evron wrote:
> > First, the NANOG list will now be moderated by a volunteer group that
> > includes Marty Hannigan, Steve Gibbard, and Chris Malayter. Many thanks
> > to these folks for taking on this role in upholding the list's AUP.
> Leaving silly disclaimers aside,
First, the NANOG list will now be moderated by a volunteer group that
includes Marty Hannigan, Steve Gibbard, and Chris Malayter. Many thanks
to these folks for taking on this role in upholding the list's AUP.
Just a small comment from someone looking from the outside of the NANOG
political m
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> >Martian addresses are relatively static, and might be good candidates for
> >one-click security. If you see a 127.0.0.0/8 packet floating around, its
> >probably up to no good.
>
> As are RFC1918 addresses.
Cisco routers are frequently used in enter
At 05:27 PM 16-02-05 -0500, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Kunjal Trivedi wrote:
> Due to the feedback we've received on the Autosecure bogon list issue,
we've
> decided to do the following:
>
> 1) Provide a fix that removes bogon ACL creation and deployment from the
> Autosecure feature
35 matches
Mail list logo
