Well, that's a good point. The UDP traffic jam probably didn't spread out to the edges of the network, where the ATMs are, as I had been thinking. The ATMs probably use private, non-routable addresses (non-routable over the Internet anyway). The bottleneck was probably more in the core of BoA's network.
Then again, mabye they do use some sort of VPN solution for their ATMs, but I doubt that.... Well, I better get back to work. The worm is becoming even more of a DoS because so many network engineers are wasting time guessing about its effects, rather than offering the services they should be! Just kidding. Priscilla John Neiberger wrote: > > Maybe this is a silly question considering where I work, but is > it > common for huge banks to connect their ATMs to their data > centers over > the Internet? We certainly don't do that, and wouldn't even > consider > doing it, so I was surprised that BofA appears to be doing just > that. > > Then again, they probably have twenty times more ATMs than we > do, so > perhaps they have different issues to be considered. > > John > > >>> "Priscilla Oppenheimer" 1/27/03 > 11:24:42 AM > >>> > Good points. How much bandwidth goes to some of the remote ATMs? > Probably > very little. They probably got crunched by the huge number of > UDP > packets. > > Of course, better filtering would have prevented that. > > But there's no need to assume that BoA runs MS-SQL or to worry > that > private > info was compromised, etc. DoS attacks usually have very little > to do > with > privacy compromises. > > Not claiming to be a security expert, so just correct me if I'm > way > off > base! :-) > > Prisiclla > > Amazing wrote: > > > > what's amazing are the assumptions that people are making--who > > says tht BoA > > servers or any BoA database were comprimised? who says they > > are even > > running MS-SQL? Read how the worm is spreading and you will > > understand > > that you dont have to be running anything that can be affected > > by the worm. > > my guess is that a company with LARGE blocks of routable > > addresses and > > probably very high speed connections to the Internet might > have > > bigger > > problems with this worm which in effect becomes a denial of > > service attack > > on their edge devices even if they are filtering out udp 1494 > > at the edge. > > > > take a look at the post by Ken and observe what is happening > to > > the CPU of > > one of his router blades..... > > > > i definitely agree with your comment about the security con > > artist > > comparison the y2k consultants > > > > ""l0stbyte"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > the "dumb butts" are allowing access to SQL from public > > networks. how > > > difficult is it to filter stuff out? SQL boxes should be on > > private > > > networks, no routes to public, second or third tier, etc. > Y2K > > all > > > over... This time in security business. Bunch of con artists > > claiming to > > > be security experts. > > > > > > Cheers... > > > > > > P.S. There was a news clip that BofA networks were effected. > > this is > > scary. > > > > > > l0stbyte > > > Symon Thurlow wrote: > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Symon > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: 26 January 2003 20:02 > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: UDP port 1434 [7:61891] > > > > > > > > > > > > d tran wrote: > > > > > > > >>You wouldn't have to fight the udp 1434 problem had you > > decided to > > > >>scrap the shitty MS SQL server, running on crappy Windows > > machine and > > > >>replace it > > > >>MySQL (freeware) or real commercial database products like > > > >>Oracle, running on > > > >>Linux platform. > > > >>Enjoy fighting udp1434. LOL > > > >>DT > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think that's true. He could have been a victim of > > other people > > > > running Windows SQL Server 2000. From what I understand > > about the worm, > > > > it not only repicated itself to other unpatched systems, > > but it send > > > > gazillions of packets to random IP addresses to port 1434. > > Many ISPs and > > > > companies were affected by it, not just the dumb butts who > > don't patch > > > > their systems. > > > > > > > > Here, we didn't seem to be affected by it, though. Maybe > > because I > > > > didn't check until Saturday afternoon? But no complaints > > came in. > > > > > > > > Are others willing to share their experiences? It could be > > a good > > > > learning opportunity. > > > > > > > > Anyone have a link to a good technical document about the > > worm? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Priscilla > > > > ============================================= > > > > > > > > This email has been content filtered and > > > > subject to spam filtering. If you consider > > > > this email is unsolicited please forward > > > > the email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and > > > > request that the sender's domain be > > > > blocked from sending any further emails. > > > > > > > > ============================================= > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=61975&t=61891 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]