I’m a little confused. I thought the concern was about decrypting
intentionally mis-routed traffic, not a suggestion that ROV uses encryption…
Regards,
-drc
> On Oct 30, 2021, at 5:57 PM, J. Hellenthal via NANOG wrote:
>
> He answered it completely. "You" worried about interception of RPKI ex
It may be possible to create a fake certificate for a fake ROA.
However, to do that requires a lot of steps to go right.
First, the RSA private key needs to be derived from the public key.
The quantum computer physics exists to do it.
However, the known technology is massively behind and may never
He answered it completely. "You" worried about interception of RPKI exchange
over the wire are failing to see that there is nothing there important to
decrypt because the encryption in the transmission is not there !
And yet you've failed to even follow up to his question... "What's your point
Hi Matthew,
Quantum computing exists as POCs, IBM being one of those advertising them
and announced to extend their project. There are others on the market,
Amazon advertised quantum computing as a service back in 2019:
https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/2/20992602/amazon-is-now-offering-quantum-com
I am very grateful for the help I received from several people (mostly off
list, which is great to avoid spamming the list).
In particular, +Giotsas, Vasileios , introduced
by Joe Provo, provided a wonderful RIPE resource which provides convenient
API to data from (at least) UCEprotect and SpamHa
(this is an answer to Matthew but also with a question to all NANOGers, see
below, under `is this true?')
Matthew, thanks for your feedback on our paper - always welcome - although
the email I sent wasn't about ROV++ but on our need for historical data on
blacklisted prefixes. (our use is not limi
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021, 15:55 A Crisan, wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
> I was reading the above exchange, and I do have a question linked to your
> last affirmation. To give you some context, the last 2021 ENISA report seem
> to suggest that internet traffic is "casually registered" by X actors to
> apply po
Hi Matthew,
What you seem to have failed to understand is that most traffic hijacks on
> the internet are not malicious in nature, they are "fat finger" incidents
> where someone has accidentally announced something they did not intend to,
> either because of faulty software (the infamous "BGP op
Hi,
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 00:48, Amir Herzberg wrote:
> Hi NANOGers, for our research on ROV (and ROV++, our extension, NDSS'21),
> we need access to historical data of blacklisted prefixes (due to spam,
> DDoS, other), as well as suspect-hijacks list (beyond BGPstream which we
> already have).
Hi NANOGers, for our research on ROV (and ROV++, our extension, NDSS'21),
we need access to historical data of blacklisted prefixes (due to spam,
DDoS, other), as well as suspect-hijacks list (beyond BGPstream which we
already have).
Basically we want to measure if the overlap (and non-overlap) bt
Anyone happen to have a contact at Verizon that can actually get an IP
delisted in their mail blacklist? I've been attempting to get an IP
delisted with Verizon for quite some time, and haven't had luck through
their web form (
http://my.verizon.com/micro/whitelist/RequestForm.a
This is probably much more appropriate over on mailop; please see:
http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop
I don't recall offhand is any Spamcop personnel hang out there, but
it's plausible to think they might.
---rsk
Anyone-
We are having a bit of trouble with spamcop blocking 2 of our MTAs with IPs of
208.65.145.71 and 208.65.145.66. We have yet to receive any samples of the spam
and do not seem to be able to submit for removal as it appears someone has
attempted to do this for us and basically used up all
On Aug 8, 2012, at 6:41 AM, Tim Burke wrote:
> Anyone have a contact involved with the APEWS blacklist? They have had a /19
> of ours blacklisted for almost two years and there seems to be no way to
> contact them to get this resolved.
In a word, no.
Much sage advice here:
Anyone have a contact involved with the APEWS blacklist? They have had a /19 of
ours blacklisted for almost two years and there seems to be no way to contact
them to get this resolved.
On 3/28/2010 12:00, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 08:51:51 CDT, Larry Sheldon said:
>> For some reason I am getting a ton of "DNR" spam from blackberry.net
>> with Subject: lines that imply that somebody here is the culprit.
>> (Hence this message here.)
>
> I figured it was
On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 08:51:51 CDT, Larry Sheldon said:
> For some reason I am getting a ton of "DNR" spam from blackberry.net
> with Subject: lines that imply that somebody here is the culprit.
> (Hence this message here.)
I figured it was just another case of something that *still* doesn't underst
For some reason I am getting a ton of "DNR" spam from blackberry.net
with Subject: lines that imply that somebody here is the culprit.
(Hence this message here.)
I am blacklisting "blackberry.net" in an effort to reduce the spam load
here.
--
Democracy: Three wolves and a sheep voting on the dinn
Hello all,
We have a customer that appears to have a portion of their ARIN-
assigned IP space blocked from accessing specific US Air Force
resources. We've tried opening tickets with various groups and are not
getting anywhere after several months of "dancing".
I was wondering if:
1) Anyon
On Fri, 2009-09-11 at 09:37 -0500, David Gower wrote:
> We are an ISP and one of our users webmail account was hacked into (poor
> passwd). Spam was sent out from it. We are black listed on Hotmail. I can't
> find anyway to get off their list. Who do I contact?
http://postmaster.live.com/ - it i
We are an ISP and one of our users webmail account was hacked into (poor
passwd). Spam was sent out from it. We are black listed on Hotmail. I can't
find anyway to get off their list. Who do I contact?
Thanks
David Gower
President
Gower Computer Support, Inc.
903 597-9220
, April 25, 2008 10:24 AM
To: Matthew Evans
Cc: Clinton Popovich; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: [NANOG] Block: Road Runner Internal IP blacklist 72.22.18.105
Matthew Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Road Runner utilizes a volume based spam block from my
> understanding. If you send o
Nauticom Internet Services
Tel: 724-933-9540
Fax: 724-933-9888
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Evans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 10:05 AM
To: Clinton Popovich; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: [NANOG] Block: Road Runner Internal IP blacklist
Matthew Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Road Runner utilizes a volume based spam block from my
> understanding. If you send over X amount of email in Y amount of time,
> they block you. You need to create a rule that staggers the number of
> messages you send to all rr.com domains so as to not
alphatheory.com
ALPHA THEORY QUICK DEMO (click here)
-Original Message-
From: Clinton Popovich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 9:51 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: [NANOG] Block: Road Runner Internal IP blacklist 72.22.18.105
Greetings all, I am having a bit of tr
Greetings all, I am having a bit of trouble with Road Runner, we have been
blocked repeatedly for email that I believe to have been sent out on the
19th. I have about 50,000 customers sitting behind this old mail server
currently. I have emailed back in forth with someone from roadrunner and
whe
26 matches
Mail list logo
