Spyware becomes increasingly malicious

Mon Jul 12 18:20:33 UTC 2004

I think depeering is a bit over the top for this situation, but I 
wouldn't blink at nullrouting the prefix in question at my cores... :)

I guess the big question is, is there anyone (other than those 
profiting directly from CWS) that would complain if a provider were to 
do such a thing...

-C

On Jul 12, 2004, at 1:34 PM, Daniel Golding wrote:

>
> On 7/12/04 12:33 PM, "Michel Py" <michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Paul Vixie wrote:
>>> or, to put it in terms you can all understand:
>>> "why does that provider's upstream still have bgp peers?"
>>
>> Maybe said upstream does not want to deal with TROs and legal issues?
>> CWS is not illegal as of today.
>
>
> CWS isn't illegal. On the other hand, there is no legal exposure from
> depeering providers who take on these customers. TRO's and such would 
> only
> come into effect if the provider's peers failed to observe the 
> contractually
> obligated notice period (30-60 days, normally).
>
> Some peering contracts specify that behaviors that endanger a network 
> or its
> users allow for immediate disconnection. Its a bit of a stretch to 
> invoke
> this for a spyware site.
>
> Depeering has been threatened as an anti-spam measure - it is 
> reasonable
> effective. This hasn't been extended to spyware, as it doesn't get the 
> same
> level of press.
>
> If you contact a provider who is hosting malware, and they refuse to 
> remove
> it or disconnect the hoster, you could always try contacting their 
> peers and
> cc:ing the offending provider. End-user networks (DSL, Cable, 
> dial-up), are
> particularly sensitive to software that might harm their users.
>
>>
>>> if you give people the means to hurt you, and they do it,
>>> and you take no action except to continue giving them the
>>> means to hurt you, and they take no action except to keep
>>> hurting you, then one of the ways you can describe the
>>> situation is "it isn't scaling well."
>>
>> Could not agree more.
>>
>> Michel.
>>
>
> -- 
> Daniel Golding
> Network and Telecommunications Strategies
> Burton Group
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20040712/cd44b184/attachment.sig>