nanog mailing list archives
Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product)
From: Stephen Griffin <stephen.griffin () rcn com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 16:42:11 -0400 (EDT)
In the referenced message, Mitch Halmu said:
On Sun, 19 May 2002, Dan Hollis wrote:netside has been a long time lunatic opponent of RBLsFirst they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me. (Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945) --Mitch NetSide
Just think, there are still the spammers who you let use your open relay. They can still speak up for you. You say is too hard to close your relay, while vast numbers of providers have done so, without issue. Every closed relay is one less that a spammer has available to abuse and mask their identity. "Once there was a great storm that washed thousands of starfish up onshore. As an old man walked the beach he saw a young boy picking up stranded starfish and quickly returning them to the sea. The man approached the boy and said, "What are you doing? The sun is rapidly rising. What difference does it make? They're all going to die anyway." As the boy rose from picking up another starfish he said, "What difference does it make? It will make a difference to this one."Then he turned and set the starfish free." -- Adapted from "The Star Thrower" by Loren Eiseley
Current thread:
- Re[8]: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product), (continued)
- Re[8]: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Allan Liska (May 19)
- Re: Re[8]: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Greg A. Woods (May 19)
- RE: Re[8]: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Benjamin P. Grubin (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Greg A. Woods (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Dan Hollis (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Mitch Halmu (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Dan Hollis (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Mitch Halmu (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Mike Lewinski (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Scott Francis (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Stephen Griffin (May 20)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Nathan J. Mehl (May 21)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Scott Francis (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Greg A. Woods (May 20)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Greg A. Woods (May 19)
- Message not available
- Re: Re[2]: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) JC Dill (May 19)
- Re: Re[2]: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Ralph Doncaster (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Scott Francis (May 18)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Ralph Doncaster (May 19)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Scott Gifford (May 18)
- Re: "portscans" (was Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product) Scott Francis (May 18)
