[191403] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Defensive" BGP hijacking?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jim deleskie)
Tue Sep 13 08:40:23 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <D570BAA4-792D-48B1-910E-50210BDD0D9A@slabnet.com>
From: jim deleskie <deleskie@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 09:31:12 -0300
To: Hugo Slabbert <hugo@slabnet.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Redirecting someone's traffic, with out there permission or a court order,
by a court in your jurisdiction, not a lot different then the "bad guys"
themselves.
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Hugo Slabbert <hugo@slabnet.com> wrote:
> Hopefully this is operational enough, though obviously leaning more
> towards the policy side of things:
>
> What does nanog think about a DDoS scrubber hijacking a network "for
> defensive purposes"?
>
> http://krebsonsecurity.com/2016/09/alleged-vdos-proprietors-arrested-in-
> israel/
>
> "For about six hours, we were seeing attacks of more than 200 Gbps hittin=
g
> us,=E2=80=9D Townsend explained. =E2=80=9CWhat we were doing was for defe=
nsive purposes. We
> were simply trying to get them to stop and to gather as much information =
as
> possible about the botnet they were using and report that to the proper
> authorities.=E2=80=9D
>
> --
> Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: hugo@slabnet.com
> pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal
