From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Dec 15 3:22:59 2000 From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 15 03:22:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from styx.astrom.net (astrom.net [193.15.98.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60E7337B400 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 03:22:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (astrom@localhost) by styx.astrom.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBFBMnm59762; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:22:49 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from patrik@astrom.net) Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:22:49 +0100 (CET) From: Patrik Astrom To: Tim McMillen Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Netcraft In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: patrik@astrom.net Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I also think that advertise your uptime is a bad thing, I have a box on uptimes.net (TMAKER) and when I first added this host to the list I entered the full hostname (By misstake). And after 2-3 days I noticed about 300-400 portscanns so I changed the name of the host on uptimes.net to not display the entire hostname, and since that I only noticed a very few attempts to probe my box. Even though Im not worried about the security on my box I think it is a bad idea to make a lot of noice of ones uptime. //Regards Patrik Astrom On Dec 15, 2000 at 04:00, Tim McMillen wrote: > Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 04:00:25 -0500 (EST) > From: Tim McMillen > To: Jeremy Vandenhouten > Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: Netcraft > > > > But what everyone is saying is that why would you want to advertise your > uptime? Only bad can come of that. Like script kiddies or worse seeing > it as a challenge and attacking until they can get in. No one else wants > it to do that, so no one sees it as fixing FreeBSD to get it to tell a > scan the uptime of a box. If it's not fixing something, why do it? > As for the 497day rollover, I'm pretty sure they are wrong. In > the record uptimes list there is one FreeBSD box (it is the number two > overall, I think) with over 800 days uptime. And yes of course those can > be fudged. I think the rollover used to be a problem with most unices but > has been fixed. > > Tim > > On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Jeremy Vandenhouten wrote: > > > Let me say this first, I love FreeBSD. Its a great platform. Now, on to > > other matters. > > > > > > the "default configuration problem?" > > > > > > What makes you think its a problem? > > > > If I thought it was a TRUE problem I wouldn't have put it in quotes. > > > > > Would you want to advertise > > > your > > > uptime so the script kiddies can confirm their kills? > > > > No offense to anyone, but for all the responses I've seen to this, none > > actually answered the question. And worst of all, I sense that I'm > > being given a slightly negative response here. Now maybe that's not > > what you meant to do, but I honestly think that as a forum we could > > come across a little more politely at times. > > > > Continuing.... > > > > Mike, thanks for the attempt at answering. I wish I knew how netcraft > > pulled their results so that I could figure out how to get them to > > accurately report it. That's why I asked if anyone else had an idea. I > > did some searching on their site, but apparently they don't provide > > that information. As for the information I provided, it was from quotes > > from their FAQ page. > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message