Re: OT: port scan
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 08:38:43PM +0000, Pollywog wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 21:18:34 +0100, Philipp Schulte said:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:04:20PM +0100, Robert Waldner wrote:
> >
> > > >Shouldn't this be <abuse@attackers_provider>?
> > >
> > > No, $yourproviders complaint is _much_ more likely to be taken
> > > seriously by $attackers_provider (and it can save you from a lot of
> > > embarassment if you´d misjudge something).
> > >
> > > In other words: you have a better stand at $yourprovider cause it´s him
> > > your money goes to.
> >
> > But what kind of pressure can $your_provider put on a portscanner from
> > $evil_provider?
>
> None, and they probably won't do anything. They have their own customers
> who cause problems to deal with. I report abusers directly to their ISP
> and I often get results; the ISP informs me that the customer was told not
> to do it again or their account was closed.
That's exactly what I am talking about! But Robert thinks it is better
to talk to my provider, which doesn't make much sense to me.
I would talk to the attacker's ISP, too.
Phil
Reply to: