nanog mailing list archives
Re: Have worm? University upgrades network
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 03:11:00 -0500 (EST)
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 warner () cats ucsc edu wrote:
What we (UC Santa Cruz) share with LB is the vendor that will be adding scanning to their net-auth box: Perfigo. We have heard of the LB plans indirectly through the vendor, but in the context of the article, it all fits.
Do people find "self-certification" by end-users actually fixes anything? Or do users keep on clicking on the "Yes, I'm Clean" button? In the meantime, you still have to carry the traffic from the infected computer if only on your quarantine "network." Usually the quarantine LAN is some type of virtual network, so the underlying bandwidth is still consumed by the traffic. Its amazing what happens to a registration server when an infected computer tries to register tens of thousands of times a minute. Redirecting the user traffic to a quarantine server, results in that server getting whalloped.
Current thread:
- Re: Have worm? University upgrades network Sean Donelan (Dec 01)
