|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: scan log and subsequent response from the host's ISP
From: sigipp
WELLA.COM.BRDate: Mon Jul 10 2000 - 07:56:40 CDT
- Next message: Gerrie: "Probally Bug in latest Bind : remote overwrite dns table entries"
- Previous message: Richard Bejtlich: "Re: Simultaneous Attacks"
- Maybe in reply to: Bradley Woodward: "scan log and subsequent response from the host's ISP"
- Next in thread: Pauel Loshkin: "Re: scan log and subsequent response from the host's ISP"
- Maybe reply: sigipp
WELLA.COM.BR: "Re: scan log and subsequent response from the host's ISP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi,
> if so to reason,in short time all of domains will be blocked. It's no way !
> We should make a dynamic mechanism for struggle with wreckers
> Do you have any ideas with ?
basically i already wrote about an idea about this. What about the following:
1. Accept a certain amount of scans.
2. If the amount of scans exceeds that, slow them down (put them in a lower
priority queue) until the amount of scans again matches the acceptable maximum.
3. On amount of scans beeing under some minimum thresold, put them back into the
normal priority queue. Or une step further to normality.
Should be no problem with newer Linux kernels. Cisco routers should have a
similar option.
Greetings
Siegfried Gipp
- Next message: Gerrie: "Probally Bug in latest Bind : remote overwrite dns table entries"
- Previous message: Richard Bejtlich: "Re: Simultaneous Attacks"
- Maybe in reply to: Bradley Woodward: "scan log and subsequent response from the host's ISP"
- Next in thread: Pauel Loshkin: "Re: scan log and subsequent response from the host's ISP"
- Maybe reply: sigipp
WELLA.COM.BR: "Re: scan log and subsequent response from the host's ISP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]