Dirk Harms-Merbitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Neither bouncing messages nor return receipts make sense for ordinary
> messages.
I disagree.
> 1) Hacker uses a tool to root compromise a few thousand home
> computers.
At which point they launch a smurf attack, which is considerably less
traceable and less preventable than what you're proposing.
Once that problem is solved, then I'll worry about this.
> 4) Amplification is very high. You send 100 bytes to generate a
> 2000 byte error message. That's 2000%.
> Even worse, how do you ever trace this back or make it stop?
Received points you directly at the compromised hosts, making this
inherently inferior from the cracker's standpoint than any attack which
can be performed with forged source addresses.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
