From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 21 04:44:12 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3218406
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 04:44:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.lariat.net (mail.lariat.net [66.62.230.51])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7410D39A
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 04:44:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from Toshi.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp1000.lariat.net@localhost
 [127.0.0.1]) by mail.lariat.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA05541;
 Thu, 20 Mar 2014 22:44:07 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <201403210444.WAA05541@mail.lariat.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 22:44:01 -0600
To: Micheas Herman <m@micheas.net>, freebsd-security@freebsd.org
From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
Subject: Re: NTP security hole CVE-2013-5211?
In-Reply-To: <CAJw6ijkqBTzcD-WyOQtiU3=R2W8fZjKR=qo5AW9836fOkyNudQ@mail.g
 mail.com>
References: <201403210421.WAA05406@mail.lariat.net>
 <CAJw6ijkqBTzcD-WyOQtiU3=R2W8fZjKR=qo5AW9836fOkyNudQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
 <freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 04:44:12 -0000

At 10:38 PM 3/20/2014, Micheas Herman wrote:
 
>While true, that does mean that amplification attacks are limited to being
>able to attack those ten machines. 

The amplifier/relay is also a victim, and can be completely disabled by the attack
if its link to the Net becomes saturated.

--Brett Glass