full-disclosure - Using LaBrea to slow down the worm

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <200308191710.h7JHAcVq009689@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu)
Subject: Using LaBrea to slow down the worm 

On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 10:37:20 CDT, Matthew Lange <matthew.lange@...geconsulting.com>  said:
> My cohorts in the office have been playing with LaBrea as a way to slow
> down the worm.  Anybody else having luck with this approach?

Nachi runs 300 threads.  It's probably on several thousand machines at least.

Compute the number of LaBrea's needed to slow it down by 10%, 25%, and 50%.
You may simplify the calculation by assuming an infinite slowdown (i.e. "out of action")
for each thread that gets LaBrea'ed.

For extra credit, estimate the deployment time for this many LaBrea boxes
compared to how long before it's time to deploy for some OTHER worm.

Sorry, but I suspect that as long as 90% of the boxes on the net have a
fundementally flawed security model, we're gonna have to just take it.
I suggest buying stock in a lubricant company - I don't see things improving
anytime soon, no matter *what* the PR out of Redmond says.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20030819/9932c308/attachment.bin