Re: Scanning whole network?

On Wednesday 07 September 2005 4:45 pm, Craig Edwards wrote:
> the problem being that you then have one point of failure.
>
> What happens if the server running that one bopm splits? the rest of
> your network is *unprotected*.
>
> What happens if that single bopm crashes (ive seen bopm crash
> before)... yet again, whole network unprotected
>
> What happens if someone hammers your network with a LOT of proxies,
> that one server generates possibly enough traffic that it uses up all
> its FD's that you allocated for bopm. Once it reaches the FD limit,
> it allows anything. Yet again, whole network unprotected... im sure
> you get the idea ;-)
>
	True, but the system ongeboren made allows you to distribute the 
scanning to multiple BOPM bots. That doesn't help with the case where 
the server splits, but at least does carry the case where one BOPM 
crashes, and alleviates overloading
> Brain
>
> Lubomir Radev wrote:
> > good for you then, you might want to try that guy's reverse
> > resolving remote NICKs bopm "serv" ;)
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joao Pinto" <[email protected]>
> > To: "Lubomir Radev" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 12:47 PM
> > Subject: Re: [bopm] Scanning whole network?
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> I don't know whats your meaning for "decently-sized", it can tell
> >> you a opm scanner with a single process can handle a 10k avg
> >> online users network (assuming you have any decent hardware with a
> >> decent network connection).
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> João Luís Marques Pinto
> >> PTlink IRC Network
> >> http://www.pt-link.net
> >> PTlink IRC Software
> >> http://software.pt-link.net
> >>
> >> Lubomir Radev wrote:
> >>> reverse resolving on each remote NICK? not really feasible on any
> >>> decently-sized network
> >>>
> >>> remote bopm scan is easily implemented with a trivial ircd patch
> >>> and bopm patch that has already been posted on this list couple
> >>> of months ago
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "ongeboren"
> >>> <[email protected]> To: "Andy Smith" <[email protected]>;
> >>> <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 5:46
> >>> AM
> >>> Subject: Re: [bopm] Scanning whole network?
> >>>
> >>>> Unreal.. uhh, lots of people don't use unreal. Maybe
> >>>> it will be a good idea to finally link to this:
> >>>> http://unborn.ludost.net/bopmserv/ from the bopm home
> >>>> page/faq, as this is the only one hybrid compatible
> >>>> server that could be used in big production networks
> >>>> to redirect connection notices to one or many bopm
> >>>> bots.
> >>>>
> >>>> --- Andy Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 01:26:10AM -0600, Name 141
> >>>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>> > is it possible to scan the whole network insted of
> >>>>>
> >>>>> one shell?  I am
> >>>>>
> >>>>> > using Unreal 3.2.3 , i told the bot to use the +s
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +cF snomasks, but it
> >>>>>
> >>>>> > only seems to scan one shell.  Is it possible to
> >>>>>
> >>>>> add 2 connexregex's ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> >  or what do i need to do to scan the whole network
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ?
> >>>>
> >>>> http://wiki.blitzed.org/BOPM/FAQ#Using_Unreal_for_proxy_scanning
> >>>>_a_whole_network
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> __________________________________________________
> >>>> Do You Yahoo!?
> >>>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> >>>> http://mail.yahoo.com

-- 
I'm sure a mathematician would claim that 0 and 1 are both very
interesting numbers.  :-)
             -- Larry Wall in <[email protected]>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBDH8yHgbFCivvqDfQRAn3vAJ4uMOyyFkyLTYRC9lrZ1lk59FpKuACgngak
wxiM3snlPE4WaTpeFUj9iZI=
=jjnC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----