On 5/31/19 5:53 PM, Bryan Holloway wrote:
Anybody else noticed a significant uptick in these e-mails?
When I first saw this thread, I hadn't seen any. A couple days later, I
got my first one. (yay!) Now I'm getting 2-3 a day. (yay?)
Intriguing.
I've not yet received a single one.
--
On 5/31/2019 8:05 PM, Richard wrote:
> On 5/31/19 8:07 PM, Niels Bakker wrote:
>> * br...@shout.net (Bryan Holloway) [Sat 01 Jun 2019, 01:54 CEST]:
>>> Anybody else noticed a significant uptick in these e-mails?
>>>
>>> When I first saw this thread, I hadn't seen any. A couple days later,
>>> I
On 5/31/19 8:07 PM, Niels Bakker wrote:
> * br...@shout.net (Bryan Holloway) [Sat 01 Jun 2019, 01:54 CEST]:
>> Anybody else noticed a significant uptick in these e-mails?
>>
>> When I first saw this thread, I hadn't seen any. A couple days later,
>> I got my first one. (yay!) Now I'm getting 2-3 a
* br...@shout.net (Bryan Holloway) [Sat 01 Jun 2019, 01:54 CEST]:
Anybody else noticed a significant uptick in these e-mails?
When I first saw this thread, I hadn't seen any. A couple days
later, I got my first one. (yay!) Now I'm getting 2-3 a day. (yay?)
Yes. It's pretty annoying. And
Anybody else noticed a significant uptick in these e-mails?
When I first saw this thread, I hadn't seen any. A couple days later, I
got my first one. (yay!) Now I'm getting 2-3 a day. (yay?)
The one-off email scheme is not predictable. It is randomly generated
string of characters.
$ ./randgen
jvtMDluV0lwnlY5O
So you can totally eliminate that possibility entirely.
-Dan
On Fri, 31 May 2019, Jason Kuehl wrote:
Is it possible, yes. I've seen it several times now at my place of
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG
TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG.
Daily listings are sent to
On 2019-05-31 01:18 +, Mel Beckman wrote:
> No, that's not the situation being discussed.
Actually, that *was* the example I was trying to give, where I
suspect many are *not* following the rules of RFC 1930.
> As I've pointed out, a multi homed AS without an IGP connecting all
> prefixes
* r...@gsp.org (Rich Kulawiec) [Fri 31 May 2019, 16:18 CEST]:
[...]
This is hardly surprising: many of them are spammers-for-hire, many of
them use invasive tracking/spyware, and none of them actually care in
the slightest about privacy or security -- after all, it's not *their*
data, why should
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 01:17:19PM +, Richard wrote:
> When I have looked into this type of issue for my unique addressing
> some did trace back to back-end db hacks (e.g., adobe), but I found
> that the most likely culprit was the 3rd-party bulk mailer that
> handled the organization's
> On May 31, 2019, at 2:17 PM, Richard
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> Date: Friday, May 31, 2019 08:04:13 -0400
>> From: Jason Kuehl >
>> Is it possible, yes. I've seen it several times now at my place of
>> work. Targeted attacks are a thing.
>>
Dan Hollis wrote:
Phishing
> Date: Friday, May 31, 2019 08:04:13 -0400
> From: Jason Kuehl
> Is it possible, yes. I've seen it several times now at my place of
> work. Targeted attacks are a thing.
>
>> >
>> > Dan Hollis wrote:
>> >
>> > Phishing scheme didn't happen.
>> >
>> > fedex has had a number of major
Hi Adam,
Le 31/05/2019 à 13:48, adamv0...@netconsultings.com a écrit :
There's got to be vendors out there having an optical chasses with a
combination of OTN and ethernet cards for the revenue side of the chasses
-look at transmode/Infinera maybe?
For now the only vendor which seems to fit
Is it possible, yes. I've seen it several times now at my place of work.
Targeted attacks are a thing.
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 2:53 AM Mike Hale wrote:
> Oh for fucks sake.
>
> Really?
>
> You two are questioning someone who subscribes to Nanog over Fedex?
> You really think it's more likely
> From: NANOG On Behalf Of Brandon Martin
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 9:16 PM
>
> I see what you're getting at. It sounds like you want to light up a 100Gb
> wave, put some committed "dedicated wavelength" services on it, then take
> whatever's left and hand it off on 100GbE for
Hi Radu,
There might be some misunderstanding here. I don't care about what's
sold or done *today*, I'm thinking ahead of what newer hardware and
software will allow us to build in the (near) future.
That's probably something most of us lack : freedom to look ahead,
rather than being
On Thu, May 30, 2019, at 09:41, Jérôme Nicolle wrote:
> Yup. Should it hard-drop ? Buffer ? Both are unthinkable in OTN terms
> (is that a cultural thing ?). It's what packet networks are made for.
> And that's why an alien device, with support for Ethernet, OTN and
> programmable pipelines,
Oh for fucks sake.
Really?
You two are questioning someone who subscribes to Nanog over Fedex?
You really think it's more likely that someone is targeting Dan Hollis
(whoever he is) instead of Fedex leaving something else exposed?
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:39 PM Scott Christopher wrote:
>
>
Dan Hollis wrote:
> Phishing scheme didn't happen.
>
> fedex has had a number of major compromises so it's not a stretch that
> their user database was stolen and sold to spammers.
The other possibility is that your one-off email scheme is predictable, and
someone knows you use FedEx, and
19 matches
Mail list logo
