BGP-based blackholing/hijacking patented in Australia?

Fri Aug 13 16:37:04 UTC 2004

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004, Niels Bakker wrote:

>
> * michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) [Fri 13 Aug 2004, 16:04 CEST]:
> >> william(at)elan.net wrote:
> >> The only imlementation change to do this would be to provide
> >> a link from the webpage where user might have been redirected
> >> to the original website they wanted to access
> >
> > But the user never wanted to access the site in the first place; lots
> > of these phishing scams either promise a free something or say that the
> > account will be de-activated, none of which exist. The reason to visit
> > a web site never existed in reality.
>
> Do you propose blocking goatse/tubgirl as well?  The same reasoning can
> apply to those sites.

some of that is done in certain localities, for instance, I believe
singapore still requires ISP's to block their monthly 'top 100' sites...
in general, it's my belief, that folks using the web should make that
censorship decision for themselves, gov'ts or ISP's shouldn't make that
call. Unfortunately, gov'ts often like to impose their will's on their
citizens.