[Operational] Internet Police

William McCall william.mccall at gmail.com
Fri Dec 10 16:44:53 UTC 2010


On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote:
> On Thursday, December 09, 2010 01:26:30 pm Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>> On Dec 10, 2010, at 1:19 AM, Michael Smith wrote:
>> > "front lines of this "cyberwar"?
>> Warfare isn't the correct metaphor.
>
>> Espionage/covert action is the correct metaphor.
>
> In reality DoS threats/execution of those threats/ 'pwning' / website vandalism are all forms of terrorism.  An easily pronounceable version with a 'net-' 'e-' or even 'cyber-' prefix..... is difficult.
>
>

Terrorism? Hell, I guess you're right since the definition of
"terrorism" seems to extend to anything remotely criminal and scary.
Especially if more than one person is involved. I bet the old school
terrorists who believed terrorism required massive panic are quite
disturbed by this lowered bar for success.

I think thats a lot of undue credit given to basic criminal behavior
and watching the boogieman come out because the perpetrators either
can't be stopped or the reality that SPs apparently don't care to stop
it.

To the folks out there that presently work for an SP, if someone
called you (or the relevant department) and gave you a list of
end-user IPs that were DDoSing this person/entity, how long would you
take to verify and stop the end user's stream of crap? Furthermore,
what is the actual incentive to do something about it?


-- 
William McCall




More information about the NANOG mailing list