FW: Death of the Internet, Film at 11

Keith Medcalf kmedcalf at dessus.com
Sat Oct 22 23:03:44 UTC 2016


> It's also generally counter to them being available outside of that
> network. 

This does not follow and is not a natural consequence of sealing the little buggers up so that they cannot affect the Internet (or you private networks).  Even if you lock you pet mouse in a cage, you can still feed it and clean up the shit in the cage.  It just isn't free to wander out and eat the floral arrangements on the end-table.

> (web and proprietary interfaces needed, SSH and telnet not).
> That's also not much I can do as a network operator.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
> 
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> From: "Chris Boyd" <cboyd at gizmopartners.com>
> To: "Elizabeth Zwicky via NANOG" <nanog at nanog.org>
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 11:42:05 AM
> Subject: Re: Death of the Internet, Film at 11
> 
> 
> > On Oct 22, 2016, at 7:34 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog at ics-il.net> wrote:
> >
> > "taken all necessary steps to insure that none of the numerous specific
> types of CCVT thingies that Krebs and others identified"
> >
> > Serious question... how?
> 
> Putting them behind a firewall without general Internet access seems to
> work for us. We have a lot of cheap IP cameras in our facility and none of
> them can reach the net. But this is probably a bit beyond the capabilities
> of the general home user.
> 
> —Chris
> 






More information about the NANOG mailing list