|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: Scan of TCP 552-554 |  |
- To: Rodrigo Barbosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Subject: Re: Scan of TCP 552-554
- From: Dave Paris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 22:02:35 -0400
- Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- In-reply-to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I believe my original reply still stands. If you're looking for
empathy or sympathy, I'm sure you'll find many commiseration partners
here. If you're looking to alter the reality of routing and/or
physics, you'll probably have a tougher go of it.
-dsp
On Friday, Aug 1, 2003, at 20:10 US/Eastern, Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 02:31:26PM -0400, Dave Paris wrote:
Not to point out the wholly obvious or anything, but...
Regardless of your response to the portscan, by the time you react it
has
already "used your link" and cost you bandwidth.
You are MOSTLY correct. But I have had cases where someone kept
portscanning me for almost a week.
--
Rodrigo Barbosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
<mime-attachment>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |