Re: DreamHost Contact?
Mike, I know Dreamhost recently moved their offices so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. I'll give you some numbers/emails that might work since there seems to be a problem reaching these guys: +1.7147064182 +1.2139471032 +1.9096260377 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - One of the founders as well Best of luck to you to getting help. -Ross On 12/30/07, Michael Greb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I've attempted to contact DreamHost NOC or Abuse departments via the numbers in whois but just get voice mail and no call back. I've got a user sending a lot of UDP traffic to 208.113.189.13 port 22. This traffic is very likely undesirable and I'd be willing to pull the plug immediately if I can get confirmation from DreamHost. Failing that I've opened an abuse ticket with the customer and given them 12 hours to respond. - -- Michael Greb Linode.com, LLC -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHeFcN0Qbp4bPZvesRAncgAJ98S3v+I/+wxal0lWZn/9GRHimqUgCg1tXW 5CnD7nmJBMDy4Jht2vxkk2k= =wtUq -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: How many others are nullrouting BT?
Yeah, I know. This is exactly why no ISPs have abuse help desks that respond, and nobody can get even the most trivial problems solved. Over generalization sucks and just proves to everyone else what an irrational individual you are. We do better. We answer *EVERY* abuse complaint. Which isn't much, because we do the job correctly. And we care about the reliability/usability of the 'Net as a whole. You do better because you are 1/1th the size of a company like BT and you handle colo only. So when the 'Net becomes partitioned by economics and politics, re-read this letter and know that I told you so. Know that being a smart-ass wasn't worth the effort. It's already going there, and everyone whines but very few of us are doing the job in a manner appropriate to actually solving problems. *Yawn* while you are at it please null route Charter, Comcast, Cox, Verizon, Att, etc. so the list doesn't have to see you send in another email with you spouting your superiority while making nonsense generalizations. Now if you are done acting like a child you should have seen that Michael Dillon is a member of this list and could have been used as a resource to handle this problem before you sent in this nonsense to the list. I hope in the future you think before you send so you don't come across as the child stamping his feet when he doesn't get the attention he wants. -Ross
Re: Broadband routers and botnets - being proactive
Gadi, I appreciate your well thought out email but I sit here and wonder what exactly you are trying to accomplish with it? Are you just trying to shame the two ISPs listed publicly or are you trying to spark a discussion about something that many people here can't fix? Many businesses today are focused on driving revenue and fixing old CPE equipment doesn't generate revenue, it only ties up money and resources that can be used elsewhere to drive revenue. If I were you I would try to spin this problem in a way where you can show large ISPs by fixing CPE's it will free up network resources and staff which can be used elsewhere. The people that can fix these problems are usually unaware of them so try to educate those people. Write CEOs/CTOs/CSOs educating them and push the security teams for these companies to escalate these issues to their upper management (on that note I would say this type of discussion would be better suited for a security mailing list for the reason I stated before, many people here can't fix these problems). Simply stating that there is a problem and shunning ISPs with this problem isn't a fix for the problem, it just makes them ignore you and the problem. -Ross
Re: what the heck do i do now?
Or just have everydns [or insert other free dns provider] handle your primary dns and let them handle the traffic, problem solved (for you atleast) :-) Personally I have no sympathy to people who are using outdated dnsbl's (especially from 1999), I would consider the wildcard if you want to actually solve the problem instead of dealing with it yourself or having to hand it off to someone else. You may also take that list of ips (with over 100 queries or so) and turn on the dnsbl with those ips added (they will only reject mail from each other but it might give some a clue). - Original Message - From: David Ulevitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: nanog@merit.edu Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 7:15 PM Subject: Re: what the heck do i do now? Paul Vixie wrote: bear with me, this appears to be about DNS but it's actually about e-mail. maps.vix.com has been gone since 1999 or so. mail-abuse.org is the new thing. i've tried just about everything to get traffic toward the old domain name to stop... right now there's a DNAME but it made no real difference. Paul, Not offering a solution but a bit of an explanation perhaps... From: http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp/rblsmtpd.html If you do not supply any -r options, rblsmtpd tries an RBL source of rbl.maps.vix.com. This will be changed in subsequent versions. So checking the last released version: /ucspi-tcp-0.88# grep -hn maps.vix.com rblsmtpd.c 193: if (flagwantdefaultrbl) rbl(rbl.maps.vix.com); Looks like that could be a cause of some of your pain... Not everyone runs rblsmptd on their mailserver, but I know lots of large mail servers that run rblsmptd (qmail). The fact that the option is the default without being explicit means that at least some folks don't even know maps.vix.com zones are no longer present and the current failure case is not impacting them. -david ulevitch
Wifi Security
Title: Wifi Security So my question is pretty simple. You have all these major companies such as google/earthlink/sprint/etc. building wifi networks. Lets say I want to collect peoples information so I setup an AP with the same ssid as googles ap so people connect to it and I log all of their traffic. Most people wont check beyond the ssid to look at the mac address but even that could be spoofed. Is there anyway to verify a certain ap beyond mac/ssid, will there be in the future? How do these companies plan to mitigate this threat or are they just going to hope consumers are smart enough to figure it out? Ross Hosman Network/Systems Administrator E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] P: 618-644-2111 x 238 C: 314-898-3381 Y!: rosshosman
Re: Wifi Security
--- Patrick W. Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 21, 2005, at 9:42 AM, Ross Hosman wrote: So my question is pretty simple. You have all these major companies such as google/earthlink/sprint/etc. building wifi networks. Lets say I want to collect peoples information so I setup an AP with the same ssid as google's ap so people connect to it and I log all of their traffic. Most people won't check beyond the ssid to look at the mac address but even that could be spoofed. Is there anyway to verify a certain ap beyond mac/ssid, will there be in the future? How do these companies plan to mitigate this threat or are they just going to hope consumers are smart enough to figure it out? Why would you even need to set up an AP? Why not just sit and sniff traffic? Gets you the _exact_ same information. And why worry about Google, etc., when Starbucks and airports have been doing this for _years_? Lastly, most consumers are smart enough to know to use encryption (the little pad-lock in their browser). Some aren't. Changing the WiFi architecture is not going to save those who aren't. -- TTFN, patrick I have to disagree that most consumers are smart enough to use encryption. Most consumers are dumb as a brick when it comes to the internet and especially security. Take a look at the average AOL user and you'll see what I'm saying. Starbucks and t-mobile is a little bit different as these networks aren't concentrated. As we companies start covering entire cities I believe you could start seeing this as becoming a regular problem. __ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Wifi Security
--- Christopher L. Morrow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yes, there are stupid people everywhere... Perhaps asking the question in another way is in order: Given a large and widely available wireless network solution for 'consumers', how would you propose to raise the 'security' for users of that network?' Would you force WEP? Would you force WPA/WPA-2? Would you force ipsec? Would you skip transport level encryption in favor of application level security? Would you do widespread and widescale education efforts for the users? -chris Google has come out with their secure access product which helps but reminding someone's grandma to use that product when she is using a wifi network is going to be near impossible. For one she doesn't know what wifi is, she just knows how to connect her computer to the internet and click that email icon on her desktop. Education will also be nearly impossible as many can hardly grasp simple concepts. With wireless encryption you could setup your fake AP to use it between the user and the AP then just sniff the traffic on the end. __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: SNMP Accounting Software
http://www.nocwizard.com/ --- Drew Weaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We need some fairly complex SNMP accounting software (data center) style stuff that can monitor cisco equipment for bandwidth utilization and generate reports based on 95th percentile and also perhaps even their actual bandwidth usage (how many gigs of transfer they use per month, day, week.. etc) Does anyone know of anything good that does anything like this? It needs to be reliable? Can be open source, we're using MRTG to track utilization but we need something that really handles accounting for us. Thanks, -Drew __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Renesys Routing Report of Level3/Cogent
I agree --- Chris Malayter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good Morning, I would suggest to the PC for the LA NANOG that they invite Todd from Renesys to do a report on the affects of the Level3 depeering of Cogent. I think this would be very informative. Thanks, -Chris __ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Regulatory intervention
Google Goes to Washington One of the issues Google will tackle has become news this week: Level 3 and Cogent Communications are involved in a spat that has made Web sites on each network inaccessible or very slow to users on the opposite network. Google said the government has a responsibility to monitor the Internet so events like this do not occur. http://www.betanews.com/article/Google_Goes_to_Washington/1128691070 Ross Hosman
Re: Regulatory intervention
Also: US Representative Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat and ranking member of the House Telecommunications Subcommittee, hinted that the Federal Communications Commission might interfere in the matter. ''Obviously, I hope the parties will reach a timely commercial arrangement to resolve this dispute, said Markey, ''but the FCC must be prepared to take steps to assure continuity of service to consumers in the event that the parties fail to reach an agreement. http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2005/10/07/dispute_threatens_to_snarl_internet/?page=2 --- Ross Hosman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Google Goes to Washington One of the issues Google will tackle has become news this week: Level 3 and Cogent Communications are involved in a spat that has made Web sites on each network inaccessible or very slow to users on the opposite network. Google said the government has a responsibility to monitor the Internet so events like this do not occur. http://www.betanews.com/article/Google_Goes_to_Washington/1128691070 Ross Hosman
Re: what will all you who work for private isp's be doing in a few years?
Not pointing any fingers but many of you think these small ISP's are just going to die off instead of adapt. Wireless is becoming a better and more reliable technology that in the future will be able to provide faster service then FTTH. I know of atleast one small ISP in Michigan that went from dial-up to deploying wireless. With WiMAX coming out I think you will see a number of smaller ISPs switching to it as a service. It is also much cheaper to deploy a wireless network. Me personally, I think wireless is the future for residential internet/tv/phone. Ross Hosman Charter Communcations --- Steve Sobol [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fred Heutte wrote: (1) There will be a market for independent ISPs as long CLECs I think a more appropriate term would be ALEC (anti-competitive local exchange carrier) ...That having been said, the problem with the small guys providing access is they can't generally achieve the economies of scale that allow them to compete with the big guys. I'm on a Charter cablemodem, 3mbps down x 256kbps up, $39.95/month. Verizon is building out FTTH in this area and they're going to be offering 5x2 for $39.95 or 10x5 for $49.95, IIRC. Those are all residential prices, but Charter's actually pretty competitive on business rates too. And yes, there are people who value service over price, but the price differential is only going to get worse. -- JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED The wisdom of a fool won't set you free --New Order, Bizarre Love Triangle
Re: what will all you who work for private isp's be doing in a few years?
Not pointing any fingers but many of you think these small ISP's are just going to die off instead of adapt. Wireless is becoming a better and more reliable technology that in the future will be able to provide faster service then FTTH. I know of atleast one small ISP in Michigan that went from dial-up to deploying wireless. With WiMAX coming out I think you will see a number of smaller ISPs switching to it as a service. It is also much cheaper to deploy a wireless network. Me personally, I think wireless is the future for residential internet/tv/phone. Ross Hosman Charter Communcations --- Steve Sobol [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fred Heutte wrote: (1) There will be a market for independent ISPs as long CLECs I think a more appropriate term would be ALEC (anti-competitive local exchange carrier) ...That having been said, the problem with the small guys providing access is they can't generally achieve the economies of scale that allow them to compete with the big guys. I'm on a Charter cablemodem, 3mbps down x 256kbps up, $39.95/month. Verizon is building out FTTH in this area and they're going to be offering 5x2 for $39.95 or 10x5 for $49.95, IIRC. Those are all residential prices, but Charter's actually pretty competitive on business rates too. And yes, there are people who value service over price, but the price differential is only going to get worse. -- JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED The wisdom of a fool won't set you free --New Order, Bizarre Love Triangle Ross Hosman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Comcast Contact
Could someone from Comcast please email me off list. Ross Hosman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
