abuse due to NIMDA attacks

[Francis J. Lacoste]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 04:39:00PM +0200, Egon Willighagen wrote:
> > No, and I don't think it is really a lacking possibility. I think there
> > should be two different reports for this. It's more clear; the description
> > and title can also be tweaked appropriately foreach.
> > The users can better know the purpose of the reports.
> 
> Ok, but it is four reports...

Yes, and you have 4 different schemas 

> 
> RP, top X

www

> RP, top X (minus attacks)

www-attack
> RP, top X (minus robots)

www-robot

> RP, top X (minus attacks, minus robots)
www-attack and www-robot

> 
> And eight if we have another possible option...
> 

Instead of going with minus, minus, minus. Why don't we try to know
what we want instead of what we don't want ?

-- 
Francis J. Lacoste
francis at Contre.COM
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.logreport.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20010924/b008f1a6/attachment.bin