nanog mailing list archives
Re: anti-spam vs network abuse
From: "Jack Bates" <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 15:11:00 -0600
Why is probing networks wrong? I would agree exploiting vulnerabilities discovered from probing networks is wrong. But I don't agree that probing is inherently wrong. People probe networks for great reasons. Likewise, people have the ability to prevent other people from probing their networks. Should we outlaw a potentially beneficial practice due to its abuse by criminals?
Okay. What happens if you make a mistake and overload one of my devices costing my company money. I guarantee you, the law will look favorably on damages. That is the problem with probing. Sometimes the probe itself can be the damage. Programmers are human. Humans make mistakes. Programmers are perfect. -Jack
Current thread:
- Re: RIPE Down or DOSed ?, (continued)
- Re: RIPE Down or DOSed ? Kai Schlichting (Feb 28)
- anti-spam vs network abuse jlewis (Feb 27)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Jack Bates (Feb 27)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse David Schwartz (Feb 27)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Roy (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Paul Vixie (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Daniel Senie (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Gary E. Miller (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Andy Dills (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Dan Hollis (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Jack Bates (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse David G. Andersen (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Richard Irving (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Charlie Clemmer (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Andy Dills (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Len Rose (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Richard Irving (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Len Rose (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Randy Bush (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Len Rose (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Rob Thomas (Feb 28)