BGP list of phishing sites?

Mon Jun 28 17:43:24 UTC 2004

On Mon Jun 28, 2004 at 04:47:21PM +0000, Paul Vixie wrote:
> if it's easier for you to BGP-blackhole these bad sources and the only
> reason you don't is because you think it would be unfair, then you're
> part of the problem and you're helping to make the problem worse.

It's wholy unfair to the innocent parties affected by the blacklisting.
i.e. the collateral damage.

Say a phising site is "hosted" by geocities. Should geocities IP addresses
be added to the blacklist?

What if it made it onto an akamaized service? Should all of akamai be 
blacklisted?

LINX produced a paper recently on why BGP poisoning is exactly the wrong 
answer to removing access to undesirable web content (i.e. phising sites).
I've asked if it can be made public.

Simon
-- 
Simon Lockhart     |   Tel: +44 (0)1628 407720 (x(01)37720) | Si fractum 
Technology Manager |   Fax: +44 (0)1628 407701 (x(01)37701) | non sit, noli 
BBC Internet Ops   | Email: Simon.Lockhart at bbc.co.uk        | id reficere
BBC Technology, Maiden House, Vanwall Road, Maidenhead. SL6 4UB. UK