Thus spake Jared Mauch
This list is the result of about a weeks worth of
work probing a total of 48394 netblocks. Of those
netblocks, 6425 were found to respond with more than
one packet sent to the network address. broadcast
address of 255 was not checked, nor anything else
than the list here. This means 13.28% of netblocks out
there are "broken".The page can be found at
http://puck.nether.net/~jared/smurfblocks.html
Why not list the netmask of the netblock as well?
In most cases you can figure out the netmasks. These blocks
were only checked at the very beginning of their space based on
the bgp announcement as viewed by our network. You can look at
our AS1225 feed at route-views.oregon-ix.net
As long as I can get the appropriate backends in place,
there will be a lot more information that i'll be making avaiable
on these blocks.
- jared
Checking only the beginning of nets for which you receive BGP
announcements fails to take into account the vast numbers of single-homed
networks which are part of large supernets. i.e. One of FDT's old UUNet
IP blocks was a /20 in 205.228.0.0/14. There are only a few dozen
announcements for: sh ip ro 205.228.0.0 255.252.0.0 longer
My list is by no means a complete list of smurf blocks, but more
a list to give you the possible netblocks that are not fixed. It is likeley
that if someone has a /19 /16 /14, etc.. that they use to assign customers
out of, if the beginning of the block is smurfable, it's quite possible
the rest of it is too.
Someone who would like to scan the entire internet is naturally
more than welcome to attempt it, scanning each possible netmask for the
entire net. The problem with that is the time it will take. My list
is a subset of all smurf amplifiers. I doubt they'll ever all go away,
but I've seen a number of networks get filtered/fixed since the posting
of it, so it's making some progress in helping.
- Jared
OTOH, the first customer in that block might have clue, and many others
might not.
I'll bet we could get much more thorough coverage if you took a BGP
routing table, expanded all supernets into collections of /24's, and then
distributed chunks of the resulting list...sort of like the rc5 encryption
breaking project. If half the subscribers of nanog would each be willing
to check one chunk, the whole list could probably be processed in no time.
Someone will try and people will die.
If no one has a gun, no one can hijack a plane.
sorry couldn't resist,
Erich
> Cheers,
> -- jr 'if everyone has a gun, no one will hijack the plane' aSomeone will try and people will die.
If no one has a gun, no one can hijack a plane.
I know this has nothing to do with NANOG but...
Why on earth not? You could hijack the plane with other weapons if no one
else had a gun. I agree with Jay, if everybody had a gun no one would
hijack the plane. Anyway, this has nothing to do with NANOG and I have
been up for way to long.
<>
Nathan Stratton Telecom & ISP Consulting
www.robotics.net nathan@robotics.net
Actually, not to alarm anyone, but onboard every commerical airliner, in
the passenger compartment (possibly several places), is enough "equipment"
to seriously damage if not cripple or destroy an airplane: There is a fire
extinguisher and a flare gun. Thats more than enough to break down the
crew compartment door and kill or severely injure the pilots and/or set it
on fire, or cause a dangerous decompression. Oddly, this is required by
the FAA. Another example which all of us on this list should know: Setting
blocks of PVC on fire will kill everyone with cyanide gas. (you don't have
any PVC covered cable in your plenums, do you? There is a good reason its
not allowed: If the cable burns, the Airconditioning will blow the cyanide
gas down on people).
Guns aren't the only weapons. They're merely the most convenient, at
present. Another thing to remember is that we only began to ban guns after
the Black Panthers (specifically their armed guards with shotguns) burst in
on the California legislature in the '60's causing a mild panic amoung the
white legislators who initially assumed the armed black people were going
to open fire. So in a sense, gun control is a racist activity. Another
personal anecdote of gun control racism is that a roommate, who was a
national record holder on the MIT pistol team, who nearly made it on US
Olympic Pistol Team, a graduate of MIT with a DOD security clearance, was
denied a pistol permit for a single shot, competition .22cal pistol in MA.
That pretty much ended his post-college shooting practice. While no reason
was given, he was Puerto Rican with apparently black features. Evidence of
racism? You decide.
--Dean