nanog mailing list archives
Re: Operation Ghost Click
From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood () cable comcast com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 12:26:20 +0000
On 4/26/12 5:47 PM, "Paul Graydon" <paul () paulgraydon co uk> wrote:
Based on conversations on this list a month or so ago, ISPs were contacted with details of which of their IPs had compromised boxes behind them, but it seems the consensus is that ISP were going to just wait for users to phone support when it broke rather than be proactive about it.
I doubt most big ISPs would be so reactive (those calls cost real money after all, and customer satisfaction suffers), but I guess you never know. At Comcast we have done the following: - Sent emails - Send postal mail - Left voicemail - Used automated outbound calling - Used increasingly persistent web browser notifications We've measured the effectiveness of some of these notification methods, which we'd not employed previously in our Constant Guard bot notification program. We're considering writing up a paper about this after the July date passes. Jason
Current thread:
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Livingood, Jason (May 01)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Rich Kulawiec (May 01)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Andrew Latham (May 01)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Valdis . Kletnieks (May 01)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Livingood, Jason (May 01)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Leo Bicknell (May 01)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click JC Dill (May 01)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Livingood, Jason (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Jeroen van Aart (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Valdis . Kletnieks (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Jeroen van Aart (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Rich Kulawiec (May 01)
