On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, J. Oquendo wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > You misunderstand. The problem of securing machines *IS* solved. It is > > possible. It is regularly done with servers connected to the Internet. > > There is no *COMPUTING* problem or technical problem. > > The problem of the 100 million machines is a social or business problem. > > We know how they can be secured, but the solution is not being > > implemented. > > > > --Michael Dillon > > > > After all these years, I'm still surprised a consortium of ISP's haven't > figured out a way to do something a-la Packet Fence for their clients
A walled garden? Surprisingly, despite little faith on NANOG, quite a few ISPs are now employing these technologies and saving money. Gadi. > where - whenever an infected machine is detected after logging in, that > machine is thrown into say a VLAN with instructions on how to clean > their machines before they're allowed to go further and stay online. If > you ask me, traffic providers (NSP's/NAP's) and ISP's don't mind this > garbage coming out of their networks, if they did they'd actually ban > together and do something about it. Its obvious those charging for > traffic will say little. Minimized traffic means minimized revenue. All > I see is "No we despise that kind of traffic" along with a shrug and > nothing being done about it. I'm sure if some legislative body somewhere > started levying fines against providers, the net would be a cleaner > place. For comments on 100 million infected machines... Doubtable. > Anyone can play fuzzy math games, heck I just strangely figured out that > MS is costing me an arm and a leg! > http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg04755.html > > > > > -- > ==================================================== > J. Oquendo > http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1383A743 > sil . infiltrated @ net http://www.infiltrated.net > The happiness of society is the end of government. > John Adams > >