RE: Publishing Nimda Logs == BAD IDEA
From: Rob Keown (Keown@MACDIRECT.COM)Date: 05/09/02
- Previous message: Blue Boar: "Re: Publishing Nimda Logs - Summary"
- Next in thread: Deus, Attonbitus: "Re: Publishing Nimda Logs == BAD IDEA"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Rob Keown <Keown@MACDIRECT.COM> To: 'Dug Song' <dugsong@monkey.org>, incidents@securityfocus.com, vuln-dev@securityfocus.com Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 18:36:20 -0400
Extremely well put. The solutions are education and continued evolution of
AV and IDS technologies (to name a few). Education for the uninformed. How
about some television commercials funded by a consortium of security
companies, etc. A web clearinghouse for the non-saavy users (there are ones
out there now but they need to be promoted).
There are probably many other good ideas, along with some responsible
journalism.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dug Song [mailto:dugsong@monkey.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 2:27 PM
To: incidents@securityfocus.com; vuln-dev@securityfocus.com
Subject: Publishing Nimda Logs == BAD IDEA
for those of you who have asked:
the presentation i gave at CanSecWest is a preliminary dump of the
data we'll be presenting at the FIRST conference next month. both the
presentation and the updated research report will be made available
from the Arbor website at that time.
we will NOT, however, be publishing a comprehensive list of infected
IPs (we have over 5 million of them, since September 2001). here are
the reasons why:
1. such a list would be useless to the general public. NOBODY in their
right mind would try to block all the individual IPs in such a
list, for they change far too much, and are far too widely
distributed to effect useful filters. these worm infection attempts
are more of a nuisance than a threat to sites that would actually
block them, anyway - so the ORBS/RBL analogy is pretty weak.
2. such a list would only benefit remote attackers. because Nimda is
fairly localized (it only attempts a completely random jump 1/4 of
the time), many of its infected hosts are actually out of the
purview of many attackers (at least, those that aren't on cable
modems themselves in 24/8). by publishing a list of Nimda hits
you've seen, you're basically handing out a map of the vulnerable
houses in your own neighborhood, inviting trouble (do you really
want your local bandwidth to be wasted on massive DDoS floods?).
3. to clean things up, we (as a community) need to act in a
coordinated fashion. if you have your own lists of infected hosts,
please, send them to your local CERT to deal with. why bother with
tracking down contacts for thousands of IPs yourself? let someone
else deal with the bureaucracy, that's what they're there for.
think community police, not lynch mob. :-)
-d.
--- http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service. For more information on this free incident handling, management and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
- Previous message: Blue Boar: "Re: Publishing Nimda Logs - Summary"
- Next in thread: Deus, Attonbitus: "Re: Publishing Nimda Logs == BAD IDEA"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|