<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fast Telco Transparent Proxy Compromised</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kuwaitisps.wordpress.com/2008/12/04/fast-telco-transparent-proxy-compromised/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kuwaitisps.wordpress.com/2008/12/04/fast-telco-transparent-proxy-compromised/</link>
	<description>Which ISP is for you?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:36:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: N.</title>
		<link>http://kuwaitisps.wordpress.com/2008/12/04/fast-telco-transparent-proxy-compromised/comment-page-1/#comment-145</link>
		<dc:creator>N.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 10:29:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwaitisps.wordpress.com/?p=252#comment-145</guid>
		<description>pardon the late reply..

The 228 servers are the production servers they are redundant, backed up, and maintained pretty well, they&#039;re also not running bind, but another flavor of unix based dns that didn&#039;t get affected by the recent dns vulnerability. The 224s were created mainly for qualitynet domain lookups and arent made for recursive lookups, technically they&#039;re only working per se cause they&#039;ve been used for a long time, but they&#039;re no longer the production servers and could easily be brought down.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>pardon the late reply..</p>
<p>The 228 servers are the production servers they are redundant, backed up, and maintained pretty well, they&#8217;re also not running bind, but another flavor of unix based dns that didn&#8217;t get affected by the recent dns vulnerability. The 224s were created mainly for qualitynet domain lookups and arent made for recursive lookups, technically they&#8217;re only working per se cause they&#8217;ve been used for a long time, but they&#8217;re no longer the production servers and could easily be brought down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 3baid</title>
		<link>http://kuwaitisps.wordpress.com/2008/12/04/fast-telco-transparent-proxy-compromised/comment-page-1/#comment-141</link>
		<dc:creator>3baid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:41:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwaitisps.wordpress.com/?p=252#comment-141</guid>
		<description>Any reason why?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any reason why?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: N.</title>
		<link>http://kuwaitisps.wordpress.com/2008/12/04/fast-telco-transparent-proxy-compromised/comment-page-1/#comment-140</link>
		<dc:creator>N.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:39:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwaitisps.wordpress.com/?p=252#comment-140</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d go with open DNS myself, but please don&#039;t use the 195.226.224.72/4 IPs as your DNS if you want to use the Qnet dns use 195.226.228.72/4 (228 instead of 224) please. 

Thanks for the update!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d go with open DNS myself, but please don&#8217;t use the 195.226.224.72/4 IPs as your DNS if you want to use the Qnet dns use 195.226.228.72/4 (228 instead of 224) please. </p>
<p>Thanks for the update!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
