Jon Kåre Hellan wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Woolley) writes: > > >>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >>David J Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>Almost certainly what happened is that the random selection of servers >>selected one that particularly disliked unauthorised accesses on port 37 >>and deliberately served an incorrect time to such clients to try and >>dissuade them. Subsequently it selected a server that wasn't so aggressive >>in defending itself against port 37 attacks. > > > What makes you choose to call it an attack? > > Regards > > Jon
I don't know exactly how David would answer that question but I would regard any attempt at unauthorized access to any of my systems as an attack. Don't forget that there are thousands of people out there who would just love to use your system as an SMTP relay, or to distribute their latest bit of malware. Simply offering a single service is not an invitation to access some other service that is not being offered! _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
