[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20031020013932.7C6753F147@www.fastmail.fm>
From: jkmanowar9 at fastmail.fm (jkm)
Subject: AT&T early warning system
On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 12:07:14 -0700 (PDT), "S G Masood"
<sgmasood@...oo.com> said:
>
> --- Hoho <hoho@...omeat.net> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2003-10-17 at 22:44, jkm wrote:
> > > Quote 2:
> > > "AT&T saw anomalies in its network three to four
> > weeks before that worm
> > > hit and was able to take certain precautions.
> > "When the worm actually
> > > happened, AT&T's network did not take a hit,''
> > Eslambolchi said."
> >
> >
> > Doesn't it seem like they're trying to violate
> > causality? If the worm
> > doesn't exist yet, then its associated traffic
> > doesn't exist yet, hence
> > there's nothing to detect.
>
>
> ...unless they had insider information that a worm
> that exploits certain "anomalies" would be released in
> "three to four weeks" :).
> I didn't see the original article but maybe they are
> referring to the DCOM worm brigade which was
> anticipated and awaited weeks before it hit.
>
>
> --
> S.G.Masood
> Hyderabad,
> India.
>
They are actually referring to the MS-SQL Slammer worm.
Full quotation which I should have put up.
"As an example, Eslambolchi points to the MS-SQL Slammer worm, which was
reported on the Internet in January. AT&T saw anomalies in its network
three to four weeks before that worm hit and was able to take certain
precautions. "When the worm actually happened, AT&T's network did not
take a hit,'' Eslambolchi said."
--
jkm
jkmanowar9@...tmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home and the web
Powered by blists - more mailing lists