IP: Re: Italian cops reportedly seize netstrike.it servers; mirror site

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

This note gives me a chance to repeat what I have said in the past. My 
sending IP out does NOT endorse an action, it tells you about things. djf


> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> Cc: saloxin () squat net
> Subject: Re: IP: Italian cops reportedly seize netstrike.it servers; 
> mirror site
> From: remco () rc6 org (Remco B. Brink)
> Organization: rc6.org <http://www.rc6.org>
> Date: 14 Aug 2001 10:12:21 +0200
>
>
> > > Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 16:25:46 +0200
> > > From: nicholas <saloxin () squat net>
> > > Subject: netstrike mirrored at http://www.contrast.org/netstrike
> > >
> > > netstrike.it is now mirrored at
> > > http://www.contrast.org/netstrike
> > >
> > > There was quite a lot of discussion internally on contrast.org about
> > > hosting netstrike. They provide a howto for manual ddos attacks, in
> > > a social framework. We at contrast.org do not approve of ddos
> > > attacks. But netstrike was taken offline by italian police. It
> > > deserves it place on the web. It is mirrored across the world, and
> > > on contrast.
>
> Netstrike most certainly does not deserve a place on the web and the analogy
> with a peaceful sit-in is totally wrong in my opinion.
>
> Netstrike promotes DDOS attacks, which apart from being extremely annoying
> and in some countries most likely (if not already) illegal, severely disrupt
> normal network traffic and cost quite a lot of money to more than just the
> company responsible for the content on one specific site.
>
> The biggest problem is that huge amounts of traffic hardly ever influence
> just one particular URL. It also affects customers of the ISP the attacked
> site is run on, their uplink provider, people using the attacked site etc
> and will therefor disrupt all kinds of network traffic that is totally
> unrelated to the attacked site. Think DNS, mail and similar traffic here.
>
> In my opinion the Italian police (or the "fascist italian state" as they
> so humbly put it) was very right in confiscating their equipment.
>
> If a project like Netstrike would take out *our* uplink provider because
> it's hosting a site that they don't agree with then I'd love to hear
> their explanation on why that should cost the company I work for money.
>
> Besides, who are they to decide what should and should not be on the net?
>
> regards,
> Remco
>
> --
> Remco B. Brink - SOL Børs A/S systemsdeveloper - http://www.norge-invest.no
> Personal site at http://rc6.org  -  PGP/GnuPG key at http://rc6.org/rbb.pgp
>
> "In God We Trust, Others We Monitor"



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/