[192259] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Death of the Internet, Film at 11
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stephen Satchell)
Sun Oct 23 21:51:24 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
From: Stephen Satchell <list@satchell.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 18:51:20 -0700
In-Reply-To: <97353.1477264758@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 10/23/2016 04:19 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> I guess that's just an example of what somebody else already noted here,
> i.e. that providers don't care to spend the time and/or effort and/or
> money necessary to actually -do- anything about compromised boxes, and
> anyway, they don't want to lose a paying customer.
That was a lesson well-learned in the e-mail community, that the
majority of providers don't care as long as the actions of "target"
admins amount to nothing. Hell, they used to spam themselves! That's
why the DNSBLs became so popular.
So, bottom line, nothing is going to happen until the cost to those
negligent provides rises so high as to affect profits. Period.
Larger eyeball operators could help, by shutting down entire subnets
infested with botted computers and things.
