Re:Internet traffic for Google, Facebook, Apple was briefly ...
by iDemonix on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @03:55AM
(#15912994)
I work for a medium sized ISP, we have about 500 peers over exchanges like LONAP and Linx. You'd be surprised how many of our peers won't use MD5 passwords or even filter properly.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Internet traffic for Google, Facebook, Apple was briefly ...
by pas on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @08:39AM
(#15914092)
They propagate a few prefixes toward you, right?
So you have to filter what you accept from them, no?
What mechanisms do you have for this?
If it's a lookup, why it's not feasible for higher Tier ISPs?
Re:Internet traffic for Google, Facebook, Apple was briefly ...
by riffic on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @04:01AM
(#15913018)
Name and shame?
Re:Internet traffic for Google, Facebook, Apple was briefly ...
by maltalex on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @05:21AM
(#15913331)
Bad idea.
These are customers he's talking about. If you want to stay in business, naming and shaming your customers isn't a good strategy.
Re:Internet traffic for Google, Facebook, Apple was briefly ...
by a012 on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @04:43AM
(#15913174)
Probably he's still working at there, so he'd be forbidden to disclose customers name.
Re:Internet traffic for Google, Facebook, Apple was briefly ...
by dredmorbius on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @09:43AM
(#15914481)
BGP peerings are publically published, that's how they work.
Knowing which customers fail to secure their comms is another matter.