Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: SMURF amplifier block list
From: Dave Andersen <angio () angio net>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 18:04:15 -0600 (MDT)

Lo and behold, Dean Anderson once said:

[Discussion about the use of .0 as broadcast deleted]

But it is interesting that the person would have thought to use it in a
smurf attack...  If they know that much, they really should have known
better than to smurf. I hope they throw the whole bookcase at them...

   Not really.  The lists of smurfable addresses on the net have contained
network numbers for a while now, or so goes the rumor on other lists.  It
could have come through someone scanning addresses sequentially to find a
broadcast address (mm, exciting job), or it could have come from a clueful
cracker somewhere else.  It doesn't take too many brains to use the
prepackaged hacking/crashing programs people can download off Bugtraq.

(OTOH, there are quite a few clueful crackers out there, who've found that
reading the RFCs is a good thing.  Crackers reading RFCs may not be a good
thing. :-)

   -Dave



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault