"Default" Internet Service

Mon Jun 14 21:49:01 UTC 2004

Owen DeLong wrote:

> Until they sign up for Vonage, get hooked on that new multiplayer 
> realtime
> game, discover that they can share music with their friends, or just
> want to see what that next killer-app is all about.
>
> Oh, yeah, there's also IRC, YIM, AIM, etc.
>
> Those are just the applications I ran up against when I put a strict
> firewall in for my parents (who I regard as being pretty typical of the
> we don't know what internet is, but, we want it mom/dad set). 

I'm not saying don't permit them at all, I'm saying create a default 
account where access is not available, where the customers have to know 
a bit about what's going on to make that default blocked account into a 
default not blocked account - there gives the ability to force 
education.  You could also then add extra terms into the equation - as 
part of the 'non blocked account agreement' the customer has a 'bond' 
where they get infected without due dilligence, they loose their 
bond.... there are hundreds of ideas, some which will work some which 
won't - the key point is most of the ISPs in the USA (but not only them, 
other countries too) are doing NOTHING about the problem except saying 
'it costs money, whose going to pay?'... Well why should I pay, when 
your customers DDoS me?  Why should I pay to keep my email free of spam 
sent via your customers..?  Why should I pay for firewalls and spend all 
my time looking for hacking incidents because you don't want to pay for 
a little education....?

> And, there's still the question of funding.  Adding simple filters
> costs money (labor, if nothing else).  Adding stateful inspection filters
> costs more money (same labor, roughly, but, most provider-side routers
> don't do stateful inspection, at least not in a scalable way).  The few
> that do, usually require additional hardware options (ASPIC, for 
> example).
>
> Who should pay for that?  I don't think the responsible clueful customers
> of an ISP should have to subsidize the clueless, even if the clueless are
> the majority.

No you're right, but then the large ISPs should have working abuse 
desks, and they should are responsible for traffic originating from 
their network.  It's only a matter of time before something will 
break...  The way things are going now with infections and exploits, I'm 
surprised people are still signing up for the internet, if something is 
not done about the problems sooner rather than later I guarentee you the 
Internet will go the way of the CB radio.... Noise will drown out the 
signal, people will stop using it because it is no longer useable, 
people who can afford it will setup on either own private frequency, the 
noise will continue until there are just a few die hards left, at which 
point the noise will slow and stop because there is no fun in drowning 
those few anymore, and all channels will become disused and quiet.....  
Then all those large ISPs out there who say 'filtering costs money why 
should we...?' will realise that it's too late to fix the problem, and 
they will either diversify or die.

 / Mat

PS: Owen, this mail is not directed specifically at you, or anyone in 
particular, I'm just on my soap box again.