BGP list of phishing sites?

Tue Jun 29 20:22:13 UTC 2004

On 29-jun-04, at 5:46, Paul Vixie wrote:

>> But if software is
>> created in such a way that regular users manage to screw up 
>> consistently,
>> maybe the software can be improved rather than the user chastised?

> we're just not communicating here.  prescriptive statements ("can be
> improved?") are inappropriate unless somebody's asking for your advice.
> in this case i think it's safe to say that software vendors don't care
> what we think about this topic and they have their own plans.

So you think it's futile to try to get software vendors to improve 
their products. I suppose I can go along with that to a certain degree. 
But how can you expect end-users to work around the brokenness in the 
software they use? This seems both unfair and futile.

> what matters isn't what folks
> ought to do, but what they will do and are doing, or won't do, etc.

Einstein taught as that even the simple act of observation influences 
our surroundings. Wouldn't it make sense to try to leverage this 
influence such that the future is shaped more to our liking, however 
small the change may be?

> in the medium and long term, no arbitrary blacklist will have global or
> lasting effect.  you don't need to take this effect into consideration,
> it's a marginal corner case at best, and a distraction.

I disagree. Even bad stuff that's limited in time and space is bad, and 
should be avoided if possible.

>> I think the one true way is to be found somewhere between the extremes
>> of controlling every little thing a customer does and not doing 
>> anything.

> ah.  you're pining for what are now thought of as "the good old days", 
> eh?

For those who suffer from a bad case of nostalgia I recommend IPv6. 
It's the closest thing to traveling back in time and watch the net as 
it was ten years ago.

However, that's not the place where I'm coming from. It's simply that 
each absolute is worse than the middle of the scale. Same thing with 
copyright violations. If we were 100% unable to do anything that the 
copyright holder doesn't want us to do, we'd be spending much more 
money on much less content. But if people were able to copy to their 
heart's content with impunity, artists wouldn't be able to make a 
living and there wouldn't be any content. So the current situation is 
indeed the good old days, even though few people seem to realize it. 
Unfortunately this isn't entirely the case with abuse handling as there 
are both people who are to lax and those who are too strict.

>> But the real issue is that this is even necessary. The biggest problem
>> we have with IP is that it doesn't provide for a way for a receiver to
>> avoid having to receiving unwanted packets. It would be extremely
>> useful if we could fix that.

> you realize that the virtual circuit X.25/TP4 people are laughing their
> asses off as they read those words, don't you?

It's easy to laugh if you don't have a world wide network to run.