Quote:
Originally Posted by morantis
@joeD, I was not saying that we only 30 clients from those locations, each of those 30 employees will produce several clients each day. It comes out to a little over 85 per day.
|
If that's the case, I still cannot see how you can have half a million email addresses within a 37KB file. Unless the file is firstly compressed (which you've not mentioned it been, we're just assuming so) and secondly contains an incredible amount of duplication. Which even with large numbers of repeated domains wouldn't be sufficient due to the need for unique name parts.
In addition, the 87KB apache example seems rather low unless the server is rarely used if it is indeed holding 7 years of access. The apache servers I run hold at most 30 days before their logs are rotated and compressed.
Quote:
@original request...
Let me repeat two vital things. #1 I have no reason to prove a thing to anyone #2 When this is needed to be in the course of business we are being paid to do it.
|
We're not talking about cisco routers though, but consumer routers. Many of which don't support SSH, some of which may not even provide telnet access. Nobody is questioning your claim of getting logs out of your router (as there are routers that provide extra space for logging), but your claim of any router.
Quote:
|
If you are attempting to get the port number and password from me here then you did not bother to read my post.
|
Why would I want a port number or password? Not that we'd need you to provide either since you've said they're using default user/pass (which btw is a bad idea, XSS browser exploits have been used to attack routers from within networks and allow outside attackers a foothold, attacks which only worked due to either default passwords been used, or unpatched firmware with known vulnerabilities)
Either way, that's nothing to do with the discussion of log sizes. What we asked for, was the command you ran to access the logs, which you've finally answered, you use a text editor to open the log file (e.g vi). That suggests you're not using "consumer" routers.
Most consumer routers will not have such a utility available. The two consumer routers I have don't even have telnet access, the one non-consumer router I have (bottom end and not a cisco) does have telnet (yes it's insecure
) but is not running anything that allows file system access.
Sure, you don't have to prove anything, but the claims you made taken at face value don't add up. Either you've made a mistake, we've misunderstood, or there's more to it that we're missing. The only way we can find which of those it is by asking you for more specifics. If you're not interested, fair enough.