That's a good point, I hadn't thought of that.
You know, I doubt we've very far from the day when ISPs are going to make
firewall use mandatory for home users.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Michael Stack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 2:15 PM
Subject: Re[4]: Massive ipchains
> Hello Michael,
>
> Friday, September 21, 2001, 1:53:40 PM, you wrote:
>
> MS> Might it not make more sense to create DROP rules for those IP
addresses,
> MS> rather than DENY? My understanding of iptables rules is somewhat
limited,
> MS> but if you use DROP rules, won't that at least slow down the infected
> MS> machine, waiting for the connection to your Linux box to time-out?
>
> Yes, it probably would. But from what I've read, you'll be keeping a
> small amount of bandwidth sidelined to the waiting request. If we
> were talking just a few IPs, that wouldn't be a problem. But with
> 2400 addresses, the resource consumption could prove to be too much.
>
> The weekend's coming up. Maybe we'll get some relief for a day or
> two.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Brian Curtis
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Seawolf-list mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/seawolf-list
>
_______________________________________________
Seawolf-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/seawolf-list
