Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23
  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Originally posted by Vorlin
    It'd be nice to see something done at the tcp/ip stack level to ward off some of the DoS and DDoS attacks. C
    Yup, Gibson offer a solution to only one special kind of DoS attacks (if it works, I don't know). It would be better to look at DoS and DDoS as a part of the same problem and try to come up with a solution for both of them.

  2. #22
    Off subject to change the mood in here and get a little laugh...

    how the hell hard did u laugh when u heard bout president bush chokeing on a pretzle... i mean crap thats all we need... the most powerful figure in the US chokeing to death on his dinner....

    : P

    In the words of president bush " *choke choke choke choke choke THUD* "

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001

    Re: GRC.com's new projects... opinions?

    Originally posted by Terr
    I was wandering the net, and came across GRC.com again... Apparently Mr. Gibson claims to have two new innovations, a claimed DoS-resistant TCP/IP stack, and some faster port scanning methods. I'm going to finish reading the details tomorrow, but I'm wondering whether you guys think some of it is too good to be true, not good enough, etc.
    As was mentioned above Terr, it's definitely a step sideways. It will only prevent certain styles of attack.

    One thing people need to realise is that there's no good solution to DDoS attacks. If someone can connect to your server, then why can't they simply connect all at once with a few hundred machines and overwhelm it?

    I used to hang out on news.grc.com, and to be quite frank, there are far too many people there who are blindly loyal to what Steve says. He has valid points about a lot of stuff, and is a very talented software engineer, but he opens his mouth too quickly, and doesn't utilize drafts, so he gets caught in many false statements. His publishing style leaves a lot to be desired for, and ShieldsUP! only scans like a half a dozen ports, which is OK for an end user.

    As for Nanoprobes, it was announced a long time ago, and has yet to materialize. I would infer that he's getting speed from opening multiple connections at once. Ie: NP would probably use 40-50 source ports on the box and send out packets in 40-50 packet chunks. It could be higher I suppose, but at a certain point there would be a performance hit I would think. Then again, take that with a grain of salt, I'm not 100% up on TCP/IP.
    Chris Shepherd
    The Nelson-Shepherd cutoff: The point at which you realise someone is an idiot while trying to help them.
    \"Well as far as the spelling, I speak fluently both your native languages. Do you even can try spell mine ?\" -- Failed Insult
    Is your whole family retarded, or did they just catch it from you?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

We have made updates to our Privacy Policy to reflect the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation.