Nato warns of strike against cyber attackers
fergdawgster at gmail.com
Wed Jun 9 04:22:54 UTC 2010
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 9:06 PM, JC Dill <jcdill.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dave Rand wrote:
>> I'm fond of getting the issues addressed by getting the ISPs to be
>> with the problem. If that means users get charged "clean up" fees
>> of a "security" fee, that's fine.
> "I urge all my competitors to do that."
> The problem isn't that this is a bad idea, the problem is that it's a bad
> idea to be the first to do it. You want to be the last to do it. You
> want all other companies to do it first - to charge their customers more
> (while you don't charge more and take away some of their business) to pay
> for this cost.
> It only works if everyone has to charge their customers, and the change
> (from no surcharge to mandatory charge) will have to happen universally
> and at the same time - which will never happen. Welcome to the anarchy.
Again, you can all continue to dance around and ignore the problem & chance
the probability that the U.S. Government will step in and force you to do
Pick your poison.
- - ferg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
Engineering Architecture for the Internet
ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/
More information about the NANOG