Re: fighting fire with fire as an approach to better network security?!?!?
From: Colin McKinnon (colin.thisisnotmysurname_at_ntlworld.deletemeunlessURaBot.com)
Date: 03/07/04
- Next message: Ford Prefect: "Re: fighting fire with fire as an approach to better network security?!?!?"
- Previous message: dhamma_bum: "SSL Forum"
- In reply to: Walt Howard: "Re: fighting fire with fire as an approach to better network security?!?!?"
- Next in thread: Ford Prefect: "Re: fighting fire with fire as an approach to better network security?!?!?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 17:01:01 +0000
Walt Howard spilled the following:
> In article <6427086d.0403062032.4310a0f6@posting.google.com>,
> technocrat <technocrat@hush.ai> wrote:
>>I don't want to influence a discussion on way or the other, but this
>>is a really interesting approach to network security. So, check out…
>>
>>http://www.symbiot.com
>
> Dubious claim. Accurately identifying the attackers can be quite
> difficult
> and may be impossible. Much can be spoofed, because few edge routers are
> configured to test outgoing source adddresses. Counterattacking the wrong
> source makes you no better than the original attackers.
>
It's probably also ILLEGAL to use the software in the UK, possibly other
countries too.
C.
- Next message: Ford Prefect: "Re: fighting fire with fire as an approach to better network security?!?!?"
- Previous message: dhamma_bum: "SSL Forum"
- In reply to: Walt Howard: "Re: fighting fire with fire as an approach to better network security?!?!?"
- Next in thread: Ford Prefect: "Re: fighting fire with fire as an approach to better network security?!?!?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]