Re: Netgate.net.nz/ORBS spam colusion
However, I must question whether the activity Dean discusses is actually criminal. He does not accuse them of carrying out the attacks, he accuses them of transporting information published by a third party which notifies the world that his site is vulnerable to these attacks. Since Dean has published information to NANOG and other public forums stating that: 1. His sites _ARE_ vulnerable. 2. He has no willingness to fix these vulnerabilities. 3. He intends to make the internet at large responsible for his negligence WRT these sites. I seriously doubt that publishing a list of known public-nuissances is genuinely illegal. Further, unless Dean has presented netgate with a court-order showing that the court has indeed found said activity to be illegal, I think they would be negligent in turning off said service. How would you like it if your ISP shut you down because I complained to them that you were sending out messages that contained information that was publicly available, but which I didn't want published? That's what Dean's really saying. Owen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 08-Jan-2000 William Allen Simpson wrote:
Dean Anderson wrote:
I would like to get your opinions on this.
My opinion is that you should sue them vigorously -- and lose. This would help the rest of us immensely by providing a solid precedent for common carrier liability regarding the activities of our subscribers.
Every law I have seen limits common carrier liability exemption when the carrier has knowledge of the illegal activity. It is only protection when the carrier is not aware of the activity.
- -- William X. Walsh <william@dso.net> DSo Networks http://dso.net/ Fax: 877-860-5412 or +1-559-851-9192 GPG/PGP Key at http://dso.net/wwalsh.gpg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: DSo Networks
iD8DBQE4drtE8zLmV94Pz+IRAvBTAKDD9O9amegIE65UJ1Lj2htV44EurwCgrTaN Ua63qpzcXJK//Rs1PuRDfPc= =Xy8H -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[ On Saturday, January 8, 2000 at 08:14:30 (-0800), Owen DeLong wrote: ]
Subject: Re: Netgate.net.nz/ORBS spam colusion
I seriously doubt that publishing a list of known public-nuissances is genuinely illegal. Further, unless Dean has presented netgate with a court-order showing that the court has indeed found said activity to be illegal, I think they would be negligent in turning off said service.
Society, at least our Western society, has a long history of publishing such lists, and indeed the police are often the ones doing the publishing. Maybe some of you more community minded Americans can convince your President Clinton that ORBS is indeed a service that the US Gov. should operate itself in its effort to make the Internet a safer place. -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <gwoods@acm.org> <robohack!woods> Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>
Hello Greg, On Sat, 8 Jan 2000, Greg A. Woods wrote:
Subject: Re: Netgate.net.nz/ORBS spam colusion I seriously doubt that publishing a list of known public-nuissances is genuinely illegal. Further, unless Dean has presented netgate with a court-order showing that the court has indeed found said activity to be illegal, I think they would be negligent in turning off said service. Society, at least our Western society, has a long history of publishing such lists, and indeed the police are often the ones doing the
[ On Saturday, January 8, 2000 at 08:14:30 (-0800), Owen DeLong wrote: ] publishing.
Maybe some of you more community minded Americans can convince your President Clinton that ORBS is indeed a service that the US Gov. should operate itself in its effort to make the Internet a safer place. I for one would -NOT- support the idea of the US Government getting involved in an area the -could- block any email traffic to my business . Say I (or one of my employee's) forgets to pay a tax, parking ticket, or somesuch other trivility . That government agency requests that my company be placed in the now Gov controlled ORBS ... Plus Look at the USG's track record folks ?-}
If ORBS is to remain a net tool/pest I for one vote to leave it in the hands of the people whom know what it is for & how to maintain its integrity best . Right where it is now . JimL +----------------------------------------------------------------+ | James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS | | Network Engineer | 25416 22nd So | Give me Linux | | babydr@baby-dragons.com | DesMoines WA 98198 | only on AXP | +----------------------------------------------------------------+
Greg A. Woods dropped this into my mailbox:
Maybe some of you more community minded Americans can convince your President Clinton that ORBS is indeed a service that the US Gov. should operate itself in its effort to make the Internet a safer place.
funny you should mention that...in our local paper this morning was a copy of a new york times/chicago tribune article titled: "Clinton proposes cyberspace corps to battle hackers." it goes on to say that a large fund of money will be tentatively funded in fiscal year 2001 (~91 million of a ~2 billion package to fund computer security efforts) to scale up training and research into computer security...which the paper says had been "...scaled back amid criticism and privacy concerns." not sure if the full article is on the web, but if anyone is interested and it is NOT on the web, write me privately and i'll key it in. melinda b thompson
participants (4)
-
melinda b. thompson -
Mr. James W. Laferriere -
owen＠dixon.delong.sj.ca.us -
woods＠most.weird.com