Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 13:22:23 02/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 11, 2003 at 15:29:57, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 11, 2003 at 13:42:16, Bob Durrett wrote: > >> >>This computer chess bulletin board has, historically, been mostly preoccupied >>with chess engines, with an occasional reference to chess database management >>software as an afterthought. But there are other kinds of chess software which >>could and should be discussed here. These include chess servers, such as the >>Internet Chess Club [ICC] server, and online databases, such as the ChessBase >>online database. >> >>Now that the USA Federal Government has formally announced, thru CNN and other >>news media, that it has formed an Internet Warfare unit [presumably to interfere >>with IRAQ internet], ALL nations, international corporations, and other >>international organizations will feel the necessity of following suit, >>developing and using their own internet warfare capabilities, both defensive and >>offensive. Within a few years, the Internet may be VERY different. >> >>How will this affect the operation of internet chess software? Consider two >>cases: >> >>(1) Internet Chess Club: >> >>It is not uncommon to have thousands of people using the ICC server >>simultaneously. Each user relies on software, such as Blitzin, on their >>computers. The composite of the ICC server(s), the thousands of computers >>hooked up to the ICC server, and the interconnecting internet may be considered >>to be a large "system." Interference with the operation of this large system >>would disrupt ICC-related operations. >> >>A few years ago, a malicious computer guru decided to shut down ICC because he >>had been kicked out for misbehavior. That malcontent effectively "all but shut >>down" the system by sending thousands of messages to ICC. Essentially, the >>internet routers were overloaded so that ICC's server could not use the >>internet. Somehow, ICC got that *&^#$ to quit. Maybe they shot him, I don't >>know. But that was a warning! It showed that ICC is vulnerable to "internet >>warfare." >> >>It would have been quite irritating if ICC’s coverage of the Kasparov vs DJ >>match had been disrupted. >> >> >>(2) ChessBase On-line Database: >> >>I do not know about any history of interference in this case, perhaps because >>the on-line server has not been online very long. >> >>SUMMARY: >> >>Is this just "unnecessary worrying"? After all, who would care about chess??? >> >>Bob D. > > >The problem is known as a "denial of service (DOS) attack". It's based on the >idea of initiating a TCP/IP session by sending a SYN packet with a bogus return >address. The remote machine sends a packet back to start the tcp/ip handshake >negotiation, but gets no response. However, it has to wait for quite a while >before timing the connection attempt out, since net lag can cause significant >delays. If you do this over and over, you keep all "available" connections >tied up (a machine has a max number of simultaneous TCP/IP connections it >can handle) so that legit users can rarely slip into one of the free slots >since the abuser is bombarding them with new connections (most of which are >rejected due to no more slots). > >There is little that can be done. It happens to businesses around the world >on a weekly basis, and it has resulted in some businesses having to close down >permanently. A well-known ISP in NY had this happen a couple of years ago and >their customers had to move elsewhere as the ISP could not provide any tcp/ip >connectivity. > >The internet is a hostile place, but it will get better. One long-overdue >change is the elimination of _all_ anonymous activities, from anonymous >remailers, to allowing someone to send a packet that doesn't have them as the >return address, etc. > >It will eventually be fixed. IPV6 is one approach that is picking up steam. Bad part is even a moron can spoof but you can't defend properly Recently I get an attack against my winsock this even stays active after you have shutdown your conection I think a heavy penalety is apropriat for these guys. After all they are internet terrorists so Bush catch them. But why is the internet not made in such away only adresses which are needed for the actions you make are alowed this would put them out of buisnes too. so hidden activetys simply can't be excuted. It's the Internet it self which had to change not extra utiletys. Well ok an the peoples behavior There all happy they can make somebody angry but what if that angry guy all of the sudden stands on your door ? Marc Marc
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.