nanog mailing list archives
Re: "Default" Internet Service
From: Matthew Sullivan <matthew () sorbs net>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:20:04 +1000
Owen DeLong wrote:
Smith, Donald wrote: > First are the consumers willing to pay for a "safer" internet > DSL/dial/isdn? > Why should they have to?Because it costs money to mitigate the attacks coming from their infected machines. It takes people and people want to be paid. Given a larger security abuse team we could do more.That's a reason abusers should have to pay cleanup fees.
Which is something people condem me for doing with the SORBS spam database.... even with the money going directly to charity (or other non charity good causes)
Majority of people in the SORBS spam database are those who have abused my mailserver and my mailbox.
/ Mat
Current thread:
- Re: "Default" Internet Service, (continued)
- Re: "Default" Internet Service Owen DeLong (Jun 14)
- Re: "Default" Internet Service Matthew Sullivan (Jun 14)
- Re: "Default" Internet Service/Driver's License Susan Harris (Jun 15)
- Re: "Default" Internet Service/Driver's License Per Gregers Bilse (Jun 15)
- Re: "Default" Internet Service Edward B. Dreger (Jun 14)
- Re: "Default" Internet Service Matthew Sullivan (Jun 14)
- RE: "Default" Internet Service Owen DeLong (Jun 14)
- RE: "Default" Internet Service Randy Bush (Jun 14)
- RE: "Default" Internet Service Edward B. Dreger (Jun 14)
- Re: "Default" Internet Service Matthew Sullivan (Jun 14)