Re: AOL rejecting mail from IP's w/o reverse DNS ?

2003-12-07 Thread just me

On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Petri Helenius wrote:
  just me wrote:

  >Can you explain to the less hyperbolic among us, why I should be
  >obligated to exchange packets with a provider who hosts abusive
  >customers.

  You, and nobody else is not. The difference is if you carpet-bomb
  the provider or launch a smart device to it´s intended target.

  I´ll leave the rest of the obvious analogies as an excersize to the reader.

  Pete

Right. Just because a provider condones one of its customer's abusive
and irrisponsible behavior, doesn't mean it would be OK for the rest
of the provider's customers.

You don't get it. And probably never will. Enjoy your future of
Nigerian herbal viagra colonic spam.

matto


[EMAIL PROTECTED]<
   Flowers on the razor wire/I know you're here/We are few/And far
   between/I was thinking about her skin/Love is a many splintered
   thing/Don't be afraid now/Just walk on in. #include 



Re: AOL rejecting mail from IP's w/o reverse DNS ?

2003-12-07 Thread Petri Helenius
just me wrote:

Can you explain to the less hyperbolic among us, why I should be
obligated to exchange packets with a provider who hosts abusive
customers.
 

You, and nobody else is not. The difference is if you carpet-bomb the 
provider
or launch a smart device to it´s intended target.

I´ll leave the rest of the obvious analogies as an excersize to the reader.

Pete




Explanation on recently noticed increase of udp 1026-1031 traffic

2003-12-07 Thread william

The original notice about all this I received came through dshield announce.
I followed up the information and thereafter came upon the message on the 
popadstop website, its rather interesting how they claim they did not 
intend their software to send a "pop-ad" advertisement of that same software
(to random other systems) that is supposedly supposed to block such ads. 
Of course this was all just a "test" before they start selling their anti-spam
software (which would probably act like a mail worm in advertising itself)...

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?date=2003-12-04
"Handlers Diary December 4th 2003
 Updated December 5th 2003 06:39 EDT 
 PopAdStop.com Scanning Component

 For over a week, we had been tracking an increase in port 1026-1031 UDP 
 traffic. More detailed investigation revealed a component in this traffic 
 with the following characteristics:
  (*) The payload consisted of two zero bytes
  (*) A large number of sources participated in these scans
  (*) the scans came from valid IPs, and the source port did not appear to 
  be crafted
 This is different from most popup spam sent to this port. Most popup spam 
 is sent by only a small number of sources. And usually uses a fixed 
 source port. While popup spam in itself is not any more dangerous then 
 e-mail spam, and more of an annoyance, the large number of sources hinted 
 to the fact that it is likely sent from unsuspecting exploited systems 
 ("Zombies"). The connection with popup spam was made later, by allowing a 
 honeypot to respond to the two byte probe. The result was an ad sent by 
 the probing host.
 ...
 The advertised site, "www.popadstop.com" does offer a program for download,
 which promises to stop future popup spam. We downloaded the application, 
 and installed it in an isolated lab network. During install, the application
 checks for updates by requesting: www.neweststuff.com/versinfo.dat. 
 Recent version of the application do not show any further outbound 
 traffic. However, earlier version of the application did start to send 
 the typical two zero bytes and popup spam.

 Summary
  An earlier version of the software distributed by PopAdStuff did actively 
 scan and send popup spam from unsuspecting user's system."

http://www.popadstop.com
"NewestStuff.com LLC
 Official Statement
 PopAdStop has been discontinued...

 PopAdStop was a free product, and better than some similar products that 
 others have sold for up to $40 in the past. The offering included a Messenger
 popup blocker, as well as a separately downloadable free web popup blocker.
 Free products or services are apparently not always appreciated...
 Bug report: Multiple indepentant reports indicate that the first few versions
 *MAY* have been affected by a modular advertisment component that had 
 been accidentally inserted into the first version, apparently. This may 
 possibly have caused PopAdStop to advertise itself from a few systems 
 (providing a new form of Internet 'word of mouth' advertising, providing 
 much greater distribution of PopAdStop in a much shorter time than we 
 intended, and *MUCH* greater cost to *US*, because so many people
 downloaded PopAdStop from our website!!!), but was not part of the 
 design. This possible bug was fixed ON ALL AFFECTED SYSTEMS with an 
 automatic update, and no longer occurs. Very embarrassing indeed. Please 
 accept our appologies if you experienced anything like this, but please 
 do not slander us for it!!!

 The resulting public backlash and slander caused by this suspected bug 
 seriously reduced our ability to use PopAdStop as a marketing tool for 
 our SpamBurner product, and turned PopAdStop into nothing more than a 
 huge waste of our time...

 Valuable lesson from the PopAdStop project: Do not let the same programmer
 develop two different pieces of software at the same time, and probably 
 giving stuff away for free is a bad idea too..."



Cisco GSR logging issue

2003-12-07 Thread Richard Welty

i'm working with some folks to try and develop evidence about
proxy hijackers on or transiting their networks. i have useful
notes about doing this with non-GSR Cisco routers, but right
at the moment all i have for the GSRs is a note indicating that
netflow is needed. i have no personal experience with the
GSRs and am looking for one of two things:

1) someone experienced in capturing this stuff on a GSR

or

2) a pointer to a cisco oriented list where i can get 1) above.

thanks in advance,
  richard
-- 
Richard Welty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Averill Park Networking 518-573-7592
Java, PHP, PostgreSQL, Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security



Re: AOL rejecting mail from IP's w/o reverse DNS ?

2003-12-07 Thread Adam McKenna

On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 09:53:15PM -0500, Adam Kujawski wrote:
> If the customer has a dozen name servers they want you to allocate reverse DNS
> for, it could become unwieldy, but technically, is there anything wrong with
> this setup?

I believe that this setup could be susceptible to the 'gluelessness' problem
described at http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/notes.html.  At the very least it takes a
few more lookups to find the right answer.

--Adam