---
Apologies for cross-postings!
---
Call for Papers
IEE
Received some fake FedEx emails coming from "secureserver.net" servers that
afaik belong to GoDaddy.
I can give more details if someone speaks up. GMail anti-spam only picked
up a few of these, others went straight through to inbox.
Regards,
Rafael
Nmap has an option to "hide" your real IP among either a provides or IP
list of IP addresses.
" D *<**decoy1**>*[,*<**decoy2**>*][,ME][,...] (Cloak a scan with decoys)
Causes a decoy scan to be performed, which makes it appear to the remote
host that the host(s) you specify as decoys are scanning
Not a problem, the discussion was getting a bit out of hand so
misunderstandings are unsuprising.
Thank you for adding your expertise and experiences.
-Barry Shein
The World | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD
> On Mar 10, 2015, at 06:21 , Kelly Setzer wrote:
>
> Many other organizations who were innovating will be affected by the new
> rules. Many of those organizations are very small and cannot afford the
> army of lawyers that Verizon can.
Such as? Can you provide any actual examples of harmful e
On Mar 10, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Matthew Huff wrote:
> We recently got an abuse report of an IP address in our net range. However,
> that IP address isn't in use in our networks and the covering network is null
> routed, so no return traffic is possible. We have external BGP monitoring, so
> unle
>> Another very real possibility is that the person or thing which sent
>>you
>> the abuse email doesn't know what he's/it's talking about.
Was my first thought, but wanted to run this by everyone in case I was
missing something obvious.
On 3/10/15, 7:51 PM, "Roland Dobbins" wrote:
>
>On 11
Is it possible that they are getting return traffic and it's just a localized
activity? The attacker could announce that prefix directly to the target
network in an IXP peering session (maybe with no-export) so that it wouldn't
set off your bgpmon. I guess that would make more sense if they we
Interesting... we had exactly the same an hour ago. That IP was
definitely nullrouted for >1 week...
Matthew Huff:
We recently got an abuse report of an IP address in our net range. However,
that IP address isn't in use in our networks and the covering network is null
routed, so no return tra
On 11 Mar 2015, at 6:40, Matthew Huff wrote:
I assume the source address was spoofed, but this leads to my
question. Since the person that submitted the report didn't mention a
high packet rate (it was on ssh port 22), it doesn't look like some
sort of SYN attack, but any OS fingerprinting or
We recently got an abuse report of an IP address in our net range. However,
that IP address isn't in use in our networks and the covering network is null
routed, so no return traffic is possible. We have external BGP monitoring, so
unless something very tricky is going on, we don't have part of
Barry,
First, I want to apologize. I (badly) misread your email, but in case I
should not have responded that way. I would have gotten this out sooner,
but I was traveling back from the CableLabs conference.
Second, my assertion is simply that Usenet servers aren't automagically
symmetrical in
+1
Used them in a past life as a SIP ALG and NAT router for a “bring your own
broadband” hosted SIP service. Worked well enough.
You might get more suggestions if you provide a little bit more about what your
requirements are, how they’re being deployed (one-off, ISP, etc.), or what the
others
Many other organizations who were innovating will be affected by the new
rules. Many of those organizations are very small and cannot afford the
army of lawyers that Verizon can.
Judgements as to whether Net Neutrality helps or harms any specific
industry will be inevitably guided by politics. T
14 matches
Mail list logo
