full-disclosure - Compromised hosts lists

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: <20060221070958.749da9c9@homebox.slave-tothe-box.net>
Date: Tue Feb 21 14:06:04 2006
From: jlay at slave-tothe-box.net (James Lay)
Subject: Compromised hosts lists

On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 22:40:00 -0500
Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:55:06 MST, James Lay said:
> > I had heard tale of a site that had a semi-updated list of
> > compromised hosts.  I was hoping that someone knows that
> > link...would LOVE to be able to get my firewall to get this list
> > and auto-create an iptables rule.  Thanks all!
> 
> That's ass backwards.
> 
> The secure way to do this is to first deny *all* traffic, and then add
> specific rules for machines that you *do* want to talk to.
> 
> Think for a bit - if some random cablemodem in another timezone is on
> the list, why should you stop packets from it?  Why would you want to
> accept packets *before* it showed up on the list?  Why do you still
> want to accept packets from *other* boxes in the same /24 or /16?

I completely agree for ports that I would have closed, but obviously I
could not simply deny *all* traffic for port 25 and 80 let's say, as I
want them open to the public.

James