Please excuse my incessant ramblings, but I am sure some of this makes sense. I am
tired and thies email proves it.most of this is in the context of DDos
Obviously the very nature of the distributed attack makes it difficult to protect
against. Employing packet chokes, or CAR at some border
On Mon, 08 May 2000, James P. Salsman wrote:
> Keith Moore wrote:
>
> >... I do think there is some culpability on the part of the
> > software vendor. and from a purely pragmatic perspective, it's a
> > lot easier for the vendor to make software that is less susceptible
> > to such things, tha
> I think you just should not open an attachments unless you are absolutely
> sure it is safe. I mean you know what is in the attachment and it doesn't
> sound odd like subject ILOVEYOU from IETF mailing list.
Just look at you inbox now - loads of Re: VIRUS WARNING and there were a
few Re: I LOVE
Excuse me if this is answering the wron question here, but.
This is just cycling through the clients "DNS Suffix search order", which is
clearly set to: dept.other.edu
it may be additionally set up for the others also, as the implimentation of the
resolver is obviously client dependent. Afte
However - as a start, look at both open source and "commercial" products - a
few names:
Checkpoint - huge user community plus industry suport for more complete
solutions using OPSEC ( not as "complete as some others though ). Has ability
to manage other infrastructure components ( only filters )
