Re: your mail

["Matus \"fantomas\" Uhlar" <uhlar@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

-> > -> He's right that a "hiding" algorithm should be there, but I think
-> > -> its hard to implement. I dont like it either but would be nice for
-> > -> the people who are tired of smurf and other TCP/IP attacks.
-> 
-> > you are solving problem which doesn't exist for now and i am not sure if it
-> > will exist "then"
-> 
-> So, you are saying 'smurf and other TCP/IP attacks' don't exist now? Or
-> that they do not pose any actual problem? 

sorry i should say something else:

smurf is quite widely used by lamers for longer time. it's being used
especially to attack servers, and can't be simply solved. The main reason,
smurf is caused by badly configured networks (routers) while the attacker is
often unknown, and the victim is being flooded by network which doesn't do
anything bad (except that it is misconfigured).

how to get rid of these problems ? 

1. don't allow your network to receive packets broadcast/network IP's.
filter them out on your router;

2. don't allow to send out any packets which source doesn't belong to your
network (so they're spoofed).

Anyway, anyone shouls accept these rules but they won't prevent your network
from being smurfed. Such prevention is much harder to do...

Also, you are expecting that smurf problem will increase when UIN's will be
used. that's what i meant before :)

I am not sure if anonymity on IRC won't cause more problems then smurf do
later. for example - how can you ignore/ban abuser when he's anonymous and
you can ban much more people that way ?

-- 
 Matus "fantomas" Uhlar, sysadmin at Telenor Internet Kosice, Slovakia
 BIC coord for *.sk; admin of netlab.irc.sk; co-admin of irc.felk.cvut.cz
 The 3 biggets disasters: Hiroshima 45, Tschernobyl 86, Windows 95