PlayStationNetwork blocking of CGNAT public addresses

Florian Weimer fw at
Sun Sep 18 15:17:33 UTC 2016

* Simon Lockhart:

> On Sun Sep 18, 2016 at 03:58:57PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Tom Beecher:
>> > Simon's getting screwed because he's not being given any information to try
>> > and solve the problem, and because his customers are likely blaming him
>> > because he's their ISP.
>> We don't know that for sure.  Another potential issue is that the ISP
>> just cannot afford to notify its compromised customers, even if they
>> were able to detect them.
> I'd like to think that we're pretty responsive to taking our users offline
> when they're compromised and we're made aware of it - either through our own
> tools, or through 3rd party notifications.

Okay, then perhaps my guess of the ISP involved is wrong.

> The process with Sony goes something like:
> - User reports they can't reach PSN
> - We report the Sony/PSN, they say "Yes, it's blocked because that IP attacked
>   us"
> - We say "Okay, that's a CGNAT public IP, can you help us identify the which
>   inside user that is - (timestamp,ip,port) logs, or some way to identify the
>   bad traffic so we can look for it ourselves"
> - Sony say no, either through silence, or explicitly.
> - We have unhappy user(s), who blame us.

Yes, that's not very constructive.

Out of curiosity, how common is end-to-end reporting of
source/destination port information (in addition to source IP
addresses and destination IP addresses)?  Have the anti-abuse
mechanisms finalyl caught on with CGNAT, or is it possible that the
PSN operator themselves do not have such detailed data?

More information about the NANOG mailing list