>> This issue has been unresolved for way too long. All of this, in my
>> mind, this makes the plugin orphaned and unusable if not patched with
>> Mark's patch.
>
> Actually it's a patch by Daniel J McDonald from 2007-06-15.
> I just refreshed it for 0.8 and reposted it two months later.
> Credits
> This issue has been unresolved for way too long. All of this, in my
> mind, this makes the plugin orphaned and unusable if not patched with
> Mark's patch.
Actually it's a patch by Daniel J McDonald from 2007-06-15.
I just refreshed it for 0.8 and reposted it two months later.
Credits where cre
>> Well I suppose you could always take the product that you dislike so
>> badly back to the store and ask for a refund of your purchase price.
>> Sometimes it really amazes me how much, and how severely, some people
>> will gripe about free products that exist only because other people
>> volunte
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 09:18 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
> Hallo!
>
> I've noticed a few rules now that seem to score *very* low.
> For example: DYN_RDNS_AND_INLINE_IMAGE=0.001
There are a lot of possible reasons for that, including informative only
rules (which are likely to have a description
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Kevin Parris wrote:
Well I suppose you could always take the product that you dislike so badly back
to the store and ask for a refund of your purchase price. Sometimes it really
amazes me how much, and how severely, some people will gripe about free
products that exist o
John Hardin wrote ... (6/11/2009 4:21 PM):
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, John Rudd wrote:
>
>> As I've said, I don't really have a plan to incorporate the patch
>> into the main dist.
>
> You probably should. It doesn't prevent you from pursuing your design
> changes, and it would fix the problem for thos
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, John Rudd wrote:
As I've said, I don't really have a plan to incorporate the patch into
the main dist.
You probably should. It doesn't prevent you from pursuing your design
changes, and it would fix the problem for those who are experiencing the
problem today.
Is it tr
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 03:17:12PM -0400, Kevin Parris wrote:
>
> Well I suppose you could always take the product that you dislike so badly
> back to the store and ask for a refund of your purchase price. Sometimes
> it really amazes me how much, and how severely, some people will gripe
> about f
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:45, Charles Gregory wrote:
>
> With respect, your concerns about
> required testing are at the least, exaggerated. The testing has been
> done by everyone who uses the patch.
a) thank you for your well worded thoughts
b) my statement about the time it would take is
Hello all!
If I may weigh in on this botnet/dns issue
1) John I completely respect (indeed advocate) the right of volunteers to
do as they wish with their time. In all that I say that follows, I keep
that first in mind. I speak of principles, but make NO demands on your
time.
2) I d
Well I suppose you could always take the product that you dislike so badly back
to the store and ask for a refund of your purchase price. Sometimes it really
amazes me how much, and how severely, some people will gripe about free
products that exist only because other people volunteer their tim
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:21:18AM -0700, John Rudd wrote:
>
> As said elsewhere, the primary issue is how DNS is being set up, both
> by the sender and the recipient. But that's outside of the scope of
> Botnet. Within Botnet, the actual thing to be solved is moving toward
> SA's internal DNS r
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 06:46, Bill Landry wrote:
> McDonald, Dan wrote:
>> On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 21:40 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 21:11, Bill Landry wrote:
Jake Maul wrote:
> Interesting that I'm just now running into this... I've been using
> Botnet on this s
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:04:42AM -0400, Rob McEwen wrote:
> Bill Landry wrote:
> > This issue has been unresolved for way too long. All of this, in my
> > mind, this makes the plugin orphaned and unusable if not patched with
> > Mark's patch.
>
> No matter how hard you try to improve botnet:
N
> I've had no trouble with Botnet timeouts, but just now patched anyway,
> to avoid any potential trouble. I, and many others appreciate how
> responsive you've been with your sanesecurity work, but not everyone has
> the same resources.
> Whenever I install GNU free software, I have to remember th
I've had no trouble with Botnet timeouts, but just now patched anyway,
to avoid any potential trouble. I, and many others appreciate how
responsive you've been with your sanesecurity work, but not everyone has
the same resources.
Whenever I install GNU free software, I have to remember this. If
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Arvid Picciani wrote:
the amount of backscatter is getting out of control. I fear our MRA might
soon explode. I don't think this is "noise" anymore.
How many accounts are we talking about here?
If it is just one or two addresses, and the user(s) being 'spoofed' have
distin
Bill Landry wrote:
> This issue has been unresolved for way too long. All of this, in my
> mind, this makes the plugin orphaned and unusable if not patched with
> Mark's patch.
No matter how hard you try to improve botnet:
(A) botnet is still dependent on third party dns servers, many of which
a
McDonald, Dan wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 21:40 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 21:11, Bill Landry wrote:
>>> Jake Maul wrote:
Interesting that I'm just now running into this... I've been using
Botnet on this server for several months without issue.
Thanks
Hallo!
I've noticed a few rules now that seem to score *very* low.
For example: DYN_RDNS_AND_INLINE_IMAGE=0.001
Are these rules 'in development' and therefore not being assigned a
significant score as of yet? Or, more interestingly, do they represent an
'optional' set of rules that can be 'act
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 15:41 +0200, Arvid Picciani wrote:
Hi,
i'm getting _massive_ amounts of backscatter and some of the offenders
are listed in dnswl.org
Has your domain got an SPF record?
yes, and its valid
the amount of backscatter is getting out of control. I fear our MRA
might s
On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 21:40 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 21:11, Bill Landry wrote:
> > Jake Maul wrote:
> >> Interesting that I'm just now running into this... I've been using
> >> Botnet on this server for several months without issue.
> >>
> >> Thanks for the link, shorter ti
22 matches
Mail list logo
