HIJACKED: 188.8.131.52/16 -- WTF? Does anybody care?
jason at thebaughers.com
Mon Apr 4 19:30:41 UTC 2011
On 4/4/2011 1:04 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 06:09:22PM -0500, Jason Baugher wrote:
>> We would NEVER "out" the customer to the public, even if we felt the
>> abuse was intentional. My CEO and our lawyers would blow a gasket if
>> we were to potentially libel a customer.
> And this why we (the community) find ourselves where we do, because
> nearly everyone has this policy or one quite similar to it. Until
> this changes -- which will require CEOs with spines and lawyers who
> craft ToS agreements that stipulate full disclosure in abuse cases --
> there will always be one more place for The Bad Guys to go.
Full disclosure in abuse is not necessarily equivalent to full
disclosure in -suspected- abuse. The earlier comments in this thread
were more or less demands for disclosure when the vendor had not yet
been able to speak with the customer to determine if there was indeed
abuse and if it was intentional.
I suppose theoretically that a ToS could be crafted that would allow the
vendor to release customer information in the case of ANY suspected
abuse, but do you really think that would make a difference to "The Bad
More information about the NANOG