I'd just like to take a quick opportunity to clear up some misconceptions
on the subject of Denial of Service which seem to have been running
rampant around here.
First off, I am a longer time EFNet user as well as a former EFNet admin,
and I have probably been the target of every type of DoS you could imagine
at one point or another. You should not mistake cynicism for a particular
chat network for apathy about DoS. I also do not believe IRC as a service
is any less deserving of protection from attacks, but I do believe it is
far more explainable.
Secondly, let's not kid ourselves about where DoS comes from. If EFNet has
earned one distinction, it is as the source of every major DoS currently
in use against the internet. These programs don't write themselves, nor do
people learn to use them effectively for no reason. By far the VAST
majority of EVERY attack anyone on this list will EVER see *IS* related to
IRC, and if you think "la de da I'm just an innocent little network who
gets attacked for no reason" then you obviously don't know what your users
are doing. The attacks against other targets like yahoo ebay etc are very
rare and happen only as a result of packet kids building a network for use
against their IRC targets and then realizing there is a whole world out
there that doesn't see attacks like this on a regular basis.
Let's also get off our delusions of power that help us deal with the
powerlessness of being a DoS victim, no one has filed serious litigation
against a network for their unintentional involvement in a DoS, and if
anyone does it surely won't be EFNet. We all want someone to blame, but
the reality of the matter is that the vast majority of attack sources are
victims without any real negligence, and the vast majority of attacks are
simply not going to be traced back to the person responsible.
None of this changes the fundamental need to design networks which are
resistant to malicious disruption, but let's at least try to deal with the
reality of the situation.
One other comment I'll make for the people who take IRC so seriously as to
get bent out of shape over these words: It's just IRC. Repeat that to
yourself at least 10 times every night.
And one last request, unless you really have something to contribute,
please don't reply to this on-list.
Thanks.
And one last request, unless you really have something to contribute,
please don't reply to this on-list.
This is flamebait. Don't send crap to a huge list and you won't receive
replies on it.
Secondly, let's not kid ourselves about where DoS comes from. If EFNet has
earned one distinction, it is as the source of every major DoS currently
in use against the internet. These programs don't write themselves, nor do
people learn to use them effectively for no reason. By far the VAST
majority of EVERY attack anyone on this list will EVER see *IS* related to
IRC, and if you think "la de da I'm just an innocent little network who
gets attacked for no reason" then you obviously don't know what your users
are doing. The attacks against other targets like yahoo ebay etc are very
rare and happen only as a result of packet kids building a network for use
against their IRC targets and then realizing there is a whole world out
there that doesn't see attacks like this on a regular basis.
How can you sit here and say this? That's right, these programs don't
write themselves, YOU write them/have written them.
None of this changes the fundamental need to design networks which are
resistant to malicious disruption, but let's at least try to deal with the
reality of the situation.
How is anything in your email constructive/contributing? 
One other comment I'll make for the people who take IRC so seriously as to
get bent out of shape over these words: It's just IRC. Repeat that to
yourself at least 10 times every night.
Yeah, like you didn't learn that the hard way. Is it just IRC? Has your
involvement in what you call "just IRC" not made it hard for you to find
work in any respectable institution?
Adam, you were more respectable as a packet kiddie then in your fake
efforts to do anything constructive. Obviously you didn't read the
"something to contribute" part. I'm sorry I ever brought this up, efnet
kiddies can't be contained.
* Richard A. Steenbergen sez:
: > This is flamebait. Don't send crap to a huge list and you won't receive
: > replies on it.
:
: Adam, you were more respectable as a packet kiddie then in your fake
Look who's drooli^Wspeaking.
To hear you talk about respect makes me want to vomit.
> This is flamebait. Don't send crap to a huge list and you won't receive
> replies on it.
Adam, you were more respectable as a packet kiddie then in your fake
efforts to do anything constructive. Obviously you didn't read the
"something to contribute" part. I'm sorry I ever brought this up, efnet
kiddies can't be contained.
Writing 0-d4Y p4ck3t spLoitZ is hardly constructive, Dick.
It's a good thing nobody takes you seriously.
*walks away*
Ok, I'm going to lay this out once and for all and from then on you can
take your packet warrior shit and stuff it.
As has been mentioned on here before, the "0 day elite packet juarez" I'm
allegidly responsible for is stream.c. I wrote the core for a former
employer to test Cisco equipment for failure modes and improve filtering.
A coworker stole and released the code as "stream.c" 6 months later, as
"packet juarez". I came forward and admitted I knew the origins of this
code, and proceeded to educate people on how to stop it.
I'm sorry if your empty braindead little packet warrior obsessed mind
can't understand this, but there it is. I've done more to stop DoS then
you ever will. You on the other hand seem to be obsessed. I took a quick
look through NANOG archives and I havn't been able to find a SINGLE post
by you that wasn't content-less and related to DoS. I'd suggest you get a
life, the only person obsessed here is you.
As for your personal comments against me, I've been refraining from
commenting publicly but you have now flapped your mouth once too many
times. I have never talked to you or met you to my knowledge, so I'm
assuming you're hearing crap from your efnet-obsessed whore wife. All I
can say is I feel sorry for you. This is the last time I will engage in a
public debate in this subject, so if you would be so kind I'd like you to
provide ANY evidence that I have ANY involvement with packeting ANYTHING.
What? Nothing? Then sit down and shut up.
My appologies to the list for EFNet psychos in general at this point.
Again.
May I politely suggest that those involved in this discussion flame each
other off-list, or better yet, put their appendages back in their pants,
stop waving them around and attempt to actually carry on a relevant
discussion?
Heya Steve,
Yes, your idea is a good idea. My original mail was not meant to start
a flame war. Too bad people can't reply in a strictly proffessional
manner, or in exchange, answer in private or not at all.
This mailing list should not serve as anyone's battle ground. I got all
the replies I needed in private, so please, lets just end this tiresome
thread.
thank you,
--Ariel