ISP Responsibilities [WAS: Re: Nato warns of strike against cyber attackers]

Wed Jun 9 14:30:36 UTC 2010

On 6/9/2010 01:14, Paul Ferguson wrote:

> To cut through the noise and non-relevant discussion, let's see if we can
> boil this down to a couple of issues:

If I may offer a few edits and comments .....

> 1. Should ISPs be responsible for abuse from within their customer base?
> 1. Should ISPs be responsible for every thing from within their customer base?> 

> 1a. If so, how?

[Good question.  The answers will be hard, and some of the answers will
seem to some to be against their own "self interest.  How does a
toll-road operator do it?  An inn-keeper?]

> 2. Should hosting providers also be held responsible for customers who
> abuse their services in a criminal manner?

[A legal question--is the inn keeper responsible for the harm to you of
a meth lab he allows to operate in the room next to yours?]

> 2.a If so, how?

See above.

> I think anyone in their right mind would agree that if a provider see
> criminal activity, they should take action, no?

In some US states the law requires it.

> If that also holds true, then why doesn't it happen?

It's hard.  It costs to much (actually false in my opinion--see "trashed
hotel rooms").  Somebody else should be doing it.  Personal (see also
"corporations as persons") responsibility is now an undefined term.

> Providers in the U.S. are the worst offenders of hosting/accommodating
> criminal activities by Eastern European criminals. Period.

All the crap I get, I get from a (nominally[1]) US provider.

[1]  China probably holds the mortgage, which is another problem for
discussion another day (and somewhere else).

-- 
Somebody should have said:
A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.

Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb contesting
the vote.

Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca

ICBM Targeting Information:  http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml