Re: Potential Prefix Hijack

From: Mohit Lad (no email)
Date: Wed Nov 12 2008 - 12:37:29 EST

  • Next message: Paul Ferguson: "Re: [funsec] McColo: Major Source of Online Scams and Spams Knocked Offline (fwd)"

    The local scope of the event is also the reason that PHAS did not catch the
    hijack. Nevertheless, its good to have different services for hijack
    detection running independently, especially if they are getting different
    feeds. Even a hijack that is local in scope is worth alerting about; if not
    anything, at least to ensure it stays local :)

    -Mohit

    On Nov 12, 2008, at 4:52 AM, Eduardo Ascenço Reis wrote:

    Dear Fellows,

    I would like to add some information to this thread from AS27664
    perspective.

    Both AS27664 (CTBC Multimídia) and AS22548 (Nic.br) share two common points:
    1. They are IP transit customers from AS16735 (CTBC Telecom).
    2. They feed with full BGP routing table the RIS/RIPE project located
    at PTTMetro-SP, Brazil (rrc15).

    I checked all BGP updates of 2008111[01] from Route Views Archive
    Project [1] and looked for prefixes originated by AS16735. I compared
    those with the prefixes officially allocated by Registro.br to AS16735
    [2] and did not find any case o prefixes from different AS. This
    analyses confirms that yesterday AS16735 issue of IP prefixes
    Hijacking was not globally propagated.

    It seems that only some AS16735's Internet customers (like AS27664 and
    AS22548) were affect by this problem.

    Regards,

    -- 
    Eduardo Ascenço Reis
    [1] http://archive.routeviews.org/
    [2] https://registro.br/cgi-bin/whois/
    

  • Next message: Paul Ferguson: "Re: [funsec] McColo: Major Source of Online Scams and Spams Knocked Offline (fwd)"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD