Nato warns of strike against cyber attackers

J. Oquendo sil at
Thu Jun 10 13:06:10 UTC 2010

Tim Franklin wrote:
> and another checklist with a magic acronym that has everything to do
> with security theatre and nothing to do with either actual security or
> the reality of operating a network.
Checklists come in handy in fact if many were followed (BCP checklists,
appropriate industry standard fw, system rules) the net would be a
cleaner place. What I've seen by many responses are feet dragging: "Ah
why bother it won't do nothing to stop it..." Without even trying. It
all begins with one's own network. The entire concept of peering was
built on trust of the peer. Would you knowingly allow someone to share
your hallway without taking precautionary measures or at least a
vigilant eye. What happens when you see something out of the norm, do
you continue to allow them without saying anything waiting for your
neighbor to speak. In doing so, how can you be assured the individual
won't try to creep up on your property.

// JC Dill wrote:

Yes, ISPs are going to have to "handle" the problem.  But, IMHO the root
cause of the problem starts in Redmond, and ISPs should sue Redmond for
the lack of suitable security in their product, rendering it an
attractive nuisance and requiring ISPs to clean up after Redmond's
mess.  It's not fair to expect ISPs to shoulder this burden, and it's
not fair to pass on the cost to customers as a blanket surcharge (and it
won't work from a business standpoint) as not all customer use
Microsoft's virus-vector software.  And it's not really fair to expect
the end customer to shoulder this burden when it's Microsoft's fault for
failing to properly secure their software.  But end user customers don't
have the resources to sue Microsoft, and then there's that whole EULA

ISPs who are NOT a party to the EULA between Microsoft and the user, but
who are impacted by Microsoft's shoddy security can (IMHO) make a valid
claim that Microsoft created an attractive nuisance (improperly secured
software), and should be held accountable for the vandal's use thereof,
used to access and steal resources (bandwidth, etc.) from the ISP thru
the ISP's customers infested Windows computer.

More finger pointing here. Should MS now sue Adobe for shoddy coding
because Adobe's PDF reader caused a compromise (improperly secured
software). Let's take it from the top down for a moment and focus on
what is going on. Operating systems are insecure it doesn't matter if it
was produced by a company in Redmond or hacked together on IRC. ANY
operating system that is in an attacking state (dishing out malware,
attacking other machines) is doing so via a network. If slash when you
see it, do you shrug it off and say not my problem, its because of
someone's lack of oversight in Redmond when you have the capability to
stop it.

ISP's don't "have to" handle the problem, they SHOULD handle the problem.


J. Oquendo

"It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to
ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things
differently." - Warren Buffett

227C 5D35 7DCB 0893 95AA  4771 1DCE 1FD1 5CCD 6B5E

More information about the NANOG mailing list