Just 2 cents - > > Is this proposal a vaccine, or could it unleash such collateral damage > as to make the Internet useless? Keep in mind that the "attackers" are > more then likely compromised systems, and are thus "innocents." But is Are owners of long term compromised systems really "innocents"? If people have left systems compromised with worms that are attacking other networks and reports have been ignored for significant amounts of time, then surely the compromised party are guilty of negligence ? Personally, I think there are merits to some kind of "strikeback" system, but it has worse than dubious legality, and would definitely be abused (without a question). I think that ISP's need to make a more active role in this, and actively threaten to cut off customers whos compromised systems are attacking other networks on the internet. Perhaps rather than a strikeback system, something similar to ARIS could be used to send automated alerts to ISP's warning them that x number of their customers have the latest worm. In the event that ISP's are non-compliant, and don't deal with their infected customers, peering points could agree to enforce this upon ISP's. This is much preferable to doing things that may or may not be morally correct, but are a legal minefield. Thoughts ? Regards, Mark Ng (www.informationintelligence.net) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- *** Wireless LAN Policies for Security & Management - NEW White Paper *** Just like wired networks, wireless LANs require network security policies that are enforced to protect WLANs from known vulnerabilities and threats. Learn to design, implement and enforce WLAN security policies to lockdown enterprise WLANs. To get your FREE white paper visit us at: http://www.securityfocus.com/AirDefense-incidents ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 21 2003 - 09:26:45 PDT