Are botnets relevant to NANOG?
ge at linuxbox.org
Sat May 27 02:11:29 UTC 2006
On Fri, 26 May 2006, Rick Wesson wrote:
> > I am saying I am reading the OARC comments and this is sort of what
> > it fees like. As much as Gadi seems to appropriate others credit,
> > Randy Vaugh and him have been doing this work for some time and
> > deserves some credit so I'd say "have you spoken to them about how
> > to make their report better" yet instead of "create more".
> Yes, we have worked with Gati and Randy Vaugh; infact randy helped me
> out today; thanks randy!
> There is a difference in how Randy/Gati collect data and how we collect
> data. The stuff we publish are from numerous dns based realtime
> blacklists and spam traps we run. Other folks black-hole botnets and
> capture data.
> We both come up with a dataset that overlaps but we don't yet know by
> how much. So our data is another view using a different methodology and
> isn't supposed to be "better" but confirming of where the problem is and
> estimates of its magnitude.
The more we know, the better. I believe the time for action has come and
gone, but I was not born a pessimist. :)
If the first step is to de-"classify" what's public so that people are
aware of what's going on, I say bring it on.
Great work, Rick. Beer is on me this defcon.
More information about the NANOG