From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Feb 11 17:17:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by builder.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD5C53E51 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 17:17:49 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA13636; Fri, 11 Feb 2000 17:41:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 17:41:52 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Terry Lambert Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Jim , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: MSNBC article Message-ID: <20000211174152.A17536@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20000209112600.X17536@fw.wintelcom.net> <200002120044.RAA28142@usr08.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <200002120044.RAA28142@usr08.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 12:44:46AM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * Terry Lambert [000211 17:29] wrote: > > * Dag-Erling Smorgrav [000209 09:38] wrote: > > > Jim writes: > > > > http://www.msnbc.com/msn/367495.asp > > > > [...] > > > > Comments? > > > > > > It's not a vulnerability, it's a DoS. A little worse than a simple > > > flooder, but not much. MSNBC's explanation of how it works is > > > incorrect, too - what confuses the router is the destination address > > > on the ACK packet (since the packet it ACKs has a random source > > > address). There is no argument between the router and the server about > > > what's happening. > > > > Can you guys check the story again? > > I get pushed to: http://www.msnbc.com/msn/367495.asp > > > > I can't find 'BSD' or 'cooper' anywhere on the page, and hints? :) > > I took him to task on technical grounds in private email; this may > have had something to do with it. > > That's the beauty of the web -- "We have always been at war with > the East -- look at our news archives...". This is really cool, just recently another article was pulled entirely because of technical inaccuracy, see todays slashdot. I'm pretty impressed that new services are acting repsonsibly, the only problem is that it's being done in 'overwrite mode' instead of issueing errata in re previous incorrect statements. Is it really ok to post something sensational and wrong without really issuing a retraction explaining the technical innacuracy of claims made? -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message