Gadi Evron however is listed as one of the authors on a rather
interesting book "Botnets: The Killer Web Application":
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&EAN=9781597491358&itm=3
(Howsabout we stand on each others' shoulders rather than each others'
toes?)
-
On 16-May-2007, at 01:04, Ian Mason wrote:
Can I please make a [probably futile] request.
If someone thinks something is off-topic but the subject matter is
even
conceivably marginally on-topic - just skip the post. Don't start a
long
discussion of the relevance.
... or if you are unab
On Wed, 16 May 2007, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> Gadi Evron wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 May 2007, Ian Mason wrote:
> >> - so much so that this is the first time I was explicitly aware that he
> >> offers paid consultancy in this area, if that is indeed the case.
> >
> > I don't. Nor do I work for a colsultan
Gadi Evron wrote:
> On Wed, 16 May 2007, Ian Mason wrote:
>> - so much so that this is the first time I was explicitly aware that he
>> offers paid consultancy in this area, if that is indeed the case.
>
> I don't. Nor do I work for a colsultancy.
Your work for a vulnerability assessment vendor.
On Wed, 16 May 2007, Ian Mason wrote:
> - so much so that this is the first time I was explicitly aware that he
> offers paid consultancy in this area, if that is indeed the case.
I don't. Nor do I work for a colsultancy.
Thanks,
Gadi.
On 16 May 2007, at 00:53, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
[snip]
The thing is it would be really nice to have some functional
separation
between the business of this list which is operating a network, and
the
security focused lists, and the botnet/phishing/spam lists, addressing
policy lists, the i
On Tue, 15 May 2007, Joe Greco wrote:
> The thing is that there's always been too much functional separation
> between the business of this list which is operating a network, and the
> security focused lists. The business of operating a network has often
> conveniently ignored anything that does
Bearing in mind that I'm not especially a fan of Gadi,
> The thing is it would be really nice to have some functional separation
> between the business of this list which is operating a network, and the
> security focused lists, and the botnet/phishing/spam lists, addressing
> policy lists, the i
On Tue, May 15, 2007, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> Addressing the complaint that my response to Gadi was too harsh, I can
> >> only say
> >> that, to someone who isn't aware of the history, my response may seem
> >> harsh,
> >
> > I *AM* aware of the history and your respo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Addressing the complaint that my response to Gadi was too harsh, I can
>> only say
>> that, to someone who isn't aware of the history, my response may seem
>> harsh,
>
> I *AM* aware of the history and your response seems harsh. Especially so
> because you complained
from http://www.nanog.org/listfaq.html
Appropriate Topics ... ISP security ...
I think DTAG.de is a very insecure ISP.
The router is still distributed.
There is no warning by DTAG.de.
There is no fix.
There is an ongoing discussion about a troyan developed and
distributed by the german gouv
> Addressing the complaint that my response to Gadi was too harsh, I can
> only say
> that, to someone who isn't aware of the history, my response may seem
> harsh,
I *AM* aware of the history and your response seems harsh. Especially so
because you complained about a message which was about exp
Kradorex Xeron wrote:
Oh, one more thing to the first reply to this thread calling this a
non-operational issue, Gadi's in the right here: It IS an operational issue
that's getting reposted because it's NOT getting solved.
I recieved 4 emails (from Fergie, Suresh, Colin Johnson and "Kradorex
On Saturday 12 May 2007 04:35, Fergie wrote:
>
> Suresh is right -- if you don't think CPE compromises are an
> operational problem, then I'm not sure what is. :-)
>
> [changing gears]
>
> I'll even go a step further, and say that if ISPs keep punting
> on the whole botnet issue, and continue to t
14 matches
Mail list logo
