On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 10:41:23AM -0700, Matt Dillon wrote:
>
> :> Let me put it another way: I think this sort of thing is an excellent
> :> example of introducing unnecessary kernel bloat into the system. Who
> :> gives a fart whether someone can port scan you efficiently or
> :> anonymously or not? I get port scanned every day. Most hackers don't
> :> even bother with portscans, they just try the exploit on the target=
> :=20
> :> machines directly.
> :
> :Tools, not policy..
> :
> :You may not care about it, but others do.
> :
> :Kris
>
> If it isn't already a kernel option, please make it one. I don't
> want it compiled into the binary. Those people who 'care' can
> add it to their kernel config.
That's probably a reasonable compromise.
Kris
PGP signature
