In some mail from Andrzej Bialecki, sie said: > > On Sun, 13 Feb 2000, Darren Reed wrote: > > > In some mail from Elias Levy, sie said: > > [...] > > > Network Ingress Filtering: > > > -------------------------- > > > > > > All network access providers should implement network ingress filtering > > > to stop any of their downstream networks from injecting packets with > > > faked or "spoofed" addressed into the Internet. > > > > > > Although this does not stop an attack from occurring it does make it > > > much easier to track down the source of the attack and terminate it > > > quickly. > > > > > > For information on network ingress filtering read RFC 2267: > > > http://info.internet.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc/files/rfc2267.txt > > > > You know if anyone was of a mind to find someone at fault over this, > > I'd start pointing the finger at ISP's who haven't been doing this > > due to "performance reasons". They've had the ability to do it for > > years and in doing so would seriously reduce the number and possibility > > of "spoofing" attacks. > > Well, I worked at such ISP. The issue was really simple: given the choice > between: > > putting a Cisco 25xx for $x000 and hope that we can deal with the > problem when/if the customers start misbehaving, or > > putting a Cisco 47xx for $x0000, and possibly never experience the > problem, but having spent awful lot of money > > the decision to select the former had its firm economic ground, don't you > think? It's good to see that ISP's around the world prefer to have $$ in the bank rather than a secure Internet. Little wonder that hacking is so prevalent. Hmmm, I, wonder if there's grounds for sueing ISP's for being deliberately negligent or incompetant in failing to exercise due diligence in protecting the Internet from hackers ? Darren
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 15:34:37 PDT