RE: [VulnDiscuss] Re: Preventing exploitation with rebasing

 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Anyone who only implements one security method is bound to fail
anyways.  I think the point of this is to prevent script kiddie
attacks and give administrators a chance to respond to more
determined attackers.  If someone is sending 1000's of packets at a
particular service it is bound to be noticed whether it is a new
exploit or not.  If the admin has not managed to detect the attack
and take action on it by the time an attacker has brute force the
address then they are not going to have the knowledge to rebase
anyways.

I think it is a good idea that, albeit not a necessarily new one,
that needs more investigation.  Even though it's not new, it has not
been thoroughly discussed and I think it should be.

>Dear David !
>
>With all the respect... I think your ideea is a BAD one ! Why ?
>Well...  It might be verry efective if one to... mhm... 100 persons
>would aply  this technique. That's because hackers/worms wouldn't
>mind loosing a few  servers if they got the rest of the world. But
>if this technique would  became a standard then the worm-industry
>(if there is such a thing)  would also evolve... making it
>brute-force the addreses. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBPj/ic6q/UK5/FuEgEQLITQCfSQfRkuX63UWDbN699Mi2yYmdUpYAoOug
dqOMErTMYmYRveEjX+IK6mj5
=0MrM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 1/21/2003