North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Port blocking last resort in fight against virus
- From: Mans Nilsson
- Date: Tue Aug 12 11:53:03 2003
Subject: Re: Port blocking last resort in fight against virus Date: Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 10:36:12AM -0500 Quoting Jack Bates (email@example.com):
> Is it just me that feels that blocking a port which is known to be used
> to perform billions of scans is only proper? It takes time to contact,
> clean, or suspend an account that is infected. Allowing infected systems
> to continue to scan only causes problems for other networks. I see no
> network performance issues, but that doesn't mean other networks won't
> have issues.
I have two faces, let's hear what they say:
"I am a network operator. I do not see issues with my network unless
somebody fills it up beyond capacity. Then I might ask somebody a
question as to why they are shoveling so many more packets than
usual. If it is a panic, I might null0 someone. I just want to keep
my network transparent."
"I am a systems administrator. Sometimes, there are security problems with
my operating systems of choice. Then, I fix those hosts that are affected,
and all is well. The network is not bothering me as long as it is
Your chosen path is a down-turning spiral of kludgey dependencies,
where a host is secure only on some nets, and some nets can't cope
with the load of all administrative filters (some routers tend to
take port-specific filters into slow-path). That way lies madness.
Måns Nilsson Systems Specialist
+46 70 681 7204 KTHNOC
Oh my GOD -- the SUN just fell into YANKEE STADIUM!!
Description: PGP signature