Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 12 Dec 2017 09:23:55 +0100
From:      Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu>
To:        Chris H <bsd-lists@BSDforge.com>
Cc:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Procmail Vulnerabilities check
Message-ID:  <20171212082355.GE2827@home.opsec.eu>
In-Reply-To: <d25ddfa5ac0f662d6add458235daae27@udns.ultimatedns.net>
References:  <20171211184655.GC2827@home.opsec.eu> <d25ddfa5ac0f662d6add458235daae27@udns.ultimatedns.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi!

> > With transparency, I mean:
> > - reverse dns is set
> > - scan from the same IP all the time
> They don't. For the sake of argument, I'll name showdan; they use (off
> the top of my head) some 9 to 12 addresses. Addresses the move, also. :(

If their IPs are published somewhere in a parseable format,
I'm fine if it's multiple IPs or if they move etc.

> > https://github.com/TLS-Check/tls-check
> I respectfully agree to disagree with you on this. Mostly on one point;
> I should be informed *prior* to the port scan/audit, not *after*.

What type of announcement on what list/forum/irc-channel would you
accept/monitor/etc ?

Would it be sufficient, if the PTR record has some TXT that points
to the official site with the details of the scan ? So that
during incoming scans you can automatically look up the source
of the scan ?

That would differentiate a research scan from an attack scan, wouldn't it ?

Given that most attackers scan unannounced, and systems have to handle
that case, I do not see the problem in scans being done unannounced, btw.

-- 
pi@opsec.eu            +49 171 3101372                         3 years to go !



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20171212082355.GE2827>