Re: Netgate.net.nz/ORBS spam colusion
Around 11:59 AM 1/9/2000 +1100, rumor has it that Adrian J Close said:
On Sat, 8 Jan 2000, Dean Anderson wrote:
Umm, for the record, I do make such an accusation. When they probe a non-public government computer, they are violating 18 USC 1030 Sections 2(b), 2(c), and 3. Those are criminal violations. You simply may not
These may be criminal violations of US law, but I'm pretty sure New Zealand is a sovereign nation with its own government, laws and legal system. I think you'll have some trouble convincing the NZ government to allow the ORBS maintainer(s) to be extradited, especially seeing as the "crime" was committed on NZ soil where it likely isn't illegal.
I've already spoken with FBI about juridiction. FBI considers crimes against US computers to be US crimes, even when initiated from foriegn countries. They can extradite for this. That it originated from NZ isn't an issue. While the FBI agreed that these were indeed violations, my initial complaint was not prosecuted because we could at the time only come up with $900 in damages. We are closing on the $100K mark, where I'll make an updated complaint, which I hope will get more attention.
This is notionally pretty similar to what ORBS are doing in SMTP-relay land, which is understandable if you subscribe to their assertion that third-party relay is a "bad thing". If you need third party relay and deal with spammers in other ways, then ORBS become pretty annoying. Of course, you could always just ignore them...
We do ignore them. They are pretty ineffective at causing any mail problems for us. Which is another good reason not to use them. However, they enable spammers to find relays. Particularly annoying to me is they enable spammers to find our relay. When ORBS was blocked from 11/24 to 12/15, our relay troubles stopped. Spammers can't relay without a list of relays. ORBS provides that list. --Dean ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean@av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
At 05:00 PM 1/9/00 -0500, Dean Anderson wrote:
We do ignore them. They are pretty ineffective at causing any mail problems for us. Which is another good reason not to use them. However, they enable spammers to find relays. Particularly annoying to me is they enable spammers to find our relay. When ORBS was blocked from 11/24 to 12/15, our relay troubles stopped. Spammers can't relay without a list of relays. ORBS provides that list.
Why don't you go after mail-abuse.org? They have an open relay list and I thought they wanted to make new law. (Someone from mail-abuse.org is welcome to correct me if my impression is incorrect.) That way at least both parties are willing participants in the litigation. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of ORBS and do not use it. But I would hate to see what happens if lists of publicly available information is judged illegal. I wonder if search engines can be sued for listing sites they found through web crawling? I can just claim I do not want to password protect my sensitive information and now that people are finding the page in a search engine they are downloading said sensitive information without my approval. So it MUST be the search engine's fault, or better yet, their upstream's fault. I mean, they had to do an HTTP-get to find the information, isn't that intrusion upon my property? Can't wait to see how this pans out. And, yes, Dean, I am hoping that you lose and lose so badly no one tries it again.
--Dean
TTFN, patrick -- I Am Not An Isp - www.ianai.net ISPF, The Forum for ISPs by ISPs, <http://www.ispf.com> "Think of it as evolution in action." - Niven & Pournelle (OhMyGod - Watch out 'Net, I got enable again! ;-)
I wonder if search engines can be sued for listing sites they found through web crawling? I can just claim I do not want to password protect my sensitive information and now that people are finding the page in a search engine they are downloading said sensitive information without my approval. So it MUST be the search engine's fault, or better yet, their upstream's fault. I mean, they had to do an HTTP-get to find the information, isn't that intrusion upon my property?
I don't know much about this sort of law, but there is some sort of precedent, like reasonable precaution. You can't leave your home door open and then be surprised if someone walks in. Having a lock is considered a reasonable precaution. However, leaving your keys in your car doesn't entitle someone to drive off with it. Most organizations I know of try to minimize their involvement with and their necessity of attorneys and law enforcement, but once they decide either is necessary, they pursue their rights with full vigor. Deepak Jain AiNET
I've already spoken with FBI about juridiction. FBI considers crimes against US computers to be US crimes, even when initiated from foriegn countries. They can extradite for this.
... provided the other sovereign nation doesn't offer the FBI a carrot and tell them to sit and spin.
participants (4)
-
Dean Anderson
-
Deepak Jain
-
Derek J. Balling
-
I Am Not An Isp