Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | reply to espaeth
Re: Methodology problem And why is it that they only use public data? Because the ISPs will not let their data out. Just look how long it took to get bell to release their data. Look the the BS story comcast came up with for the FCC request (oh it would take too many hours, funny how everybody else got it done). One of the rules the new FCC should initiate is transparency. Force the ISPs to show what their data load is. There is absolutely no security risk in doing this. The only risk is that people will be able to see how much BS has been spread and how much greed is actually going on. |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| said by Lazlow:And why is it that they only use public data? Because the ISPs will not let their data out. .. but the public data is a gross misrepresentation of the environment they are attempting to model. This is one of those cases where "any data is better than no data" certainly isn't true.
said by Lazlow:Force the ISPs to show what their data load is. There is absolutely no security risk in doing this. Publishing detailed statistics that showed usage in relation to capacity for specific providers would be extremely helpful to the purveyors of denial of service attacks. Watch all the smaller ISPs get taken out like the fat kid in dodge ball...
The only chance to gather that data would be to put together a study like the Internet Traffic Study in Japan where statistics from all the major players are collected and sufficiently scrubbed of identifiable information so the statistics could be made public. I'm sure if a University research body presented their case to the major ISPs and had strict non-disclosure contracts they could get this done in the US. This would be limited to only reporting on how the industry as a whole is doing on capacity though. |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
2 edits | Its funny, in one line you are saying that it cannot be done(safely) and then a couple of lines down you admit that the Japanese are already doing it. To publish this data you do not need to provide attack addresses, I guess I thought that was obvious.
As far as the public data does; there is no real way to tell how valid it is UNTIL somebody (trustworthy) gets the ISP's data. |
|
espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| said by Lazlow:Its funny, in one line you are saying that it cannot be done(safely) and then a couple of lines down you admit that the Japanese are already doing it. To publish this data you do not need to provide attack addresses, I guess I thought that was obvious. You seemed to be implying the data should be supplied on an ISP by ISP basis. The data could be presented, but it would need be industry-wide and not company specific. (ie, grouping every cable operator in the country together and only reporting the summary results of the group) |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | I agree that it should be industry wide. But each ISP will have to supply that data. There is just no way around that. I am not convinced of the necessity of reporting it as a group. I can see labeling is as ISP A, ISP B, etc. But if you pour all the data in a pot and mix it up, you are not going to be able to draw nearly as much information from the data. |
|
