This is a coordinated hacking. (Was Re: Need help in flushing DNS)
Ryan - Lists
rlambert.lists at gmail.com
Thu Jun 20 21:51:17 UTC 2013
I don't think he was saying that at all. Just stating that from a pure numbers standpoint 50k/140mil is a small percentage.
OTOH, I agree to your point - Network Solutions definitely downplayed this in their release. Curiously so.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 20, 2013, at 5:42 PM, RijilV <rijilv at riji.lv> wrote:
> On 20 June 2013 14:28, <Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 14:08:18 -0700, Jeff Shultz said:
>>
>>> "small number of Network Solutions customers"
>>>
>>> They must be staffed with physicists, astronomers, or economists.... I
>>> don't know anyone else that would consider "nearly fifty thousand" (from
>>> a previous post by Phil Fagan) to be a small number.
>>
>> It's relatively small when you consider there's something like 140M .com's
> So it's okay to screw over "nearly fifty thousand" customer domains because
> there are 140M .com's? When talking about inadvertently effecting that
> many folks I don't think it is appropriate to trivialize the customer
> impact by calling it small when you're talking about a handful of large
> websites that aren't somehow magically shared over those 140M .coms. Also
> it is untrue to limit it to only "the websites" given how many other things
> folks are likely to be using DNS for...
>
> .r'
More information about the NANOG
mailing list