North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: New worm / port 1434?
- From: Adam \"Tauvix\" Debus
- Date: Sat Jan 25 15:34:31 2003
I'm betting they are saying that Code Red was worse because anyone who had
e-mail could recieve a copy. Only a select number of IP Addresses out there
are going to be running MSSQL. Personally, I agree with you, this is much
worse the Code Red...
Network Administrator, ReachONE Internet
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Bates" <email@example.com>
To: "Eric Gauthier" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: New worm / port 1434?
> From: "Eric Gauthier"
> > Woot!
> > We made the front page of CNN.com:
> > Electronic attack slows Internet
> > http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/01/25/internet.attack/index.html
> > Guess that USD10 goes to some unnamed reporter at CNN
> And please tell me how CodeRed was worse? I'm sorry, this just created a
> of Internet traffic hurting performance? That's a little underrated. But
> then again, it's a port that could be blocked and not cause severe damage.
> Block tcp/80 and people would through a fit.
> *mental note: Block port 80 anytime another port must be blocked just to
> Jack Bates
> Network Engineer
> BrightNet Oklahoma