Re: Ethical DDoS drone network

[Mark Foster <blakjak () blakjak net>]

Refer earlier posts.
End points ('drones') would have to be legitimate endpoints, not drones on 
random boxes.  That eliminates legal liability client-side.
If the traffic is non abusive then I don't see the risk for the network 
providers in the middle either.

If it's clearly established that the source (drones), destination (target) 
are all 'opted in' and there's no 'collateral damage' (in bandwidth terms 
or otherwise, being the ways in which I see other parties potentially 
being impacted) I don't know that it's anywhere near as risky as you 
imply.

You'd have to be careful not to trip IDS or similar for all the networks 
you transit, to avoid impacting on others in the event of some mis-fired 
responses...

What would be an example legitimate security purpose, except to perhaps 
drill responses to illegitimate botnets?

Mark.

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009, deleskie () gmail com wrote:

> Super risky.  This would be a 99% legal worry plus.  Unless all the end points and networks they cross sign off on it 
> the risk is beyond huge.
>
> -jim
> ------Original Message------
> From: Jeffrey Lyon
> Sender:
> To: nanog () merit edu
> Subject: Ethical DDoS drone network
> Sent: Jan 4, 2009 10:06 PM
>
> Say for instance one wanted to create an "ethical botnet," how would
> this be done in a manner that is legal, non-abusive toward other
> networks, and unquestionably used for legitimate internal security
> purposes? How does your company approach this dilemma?
>
> Our company for instance has always relied on outside attacks to spot
> check our security and i'm beginning to think there may be a more user
> friendly alternative.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
> jeffrey.lyon () blacklotus net | http://www.blacklotus.net
> Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc.
>
> Look for us at HostingCon 2009 in Washington, DC on August 10th - 12th
> at Booth #401.
>
>
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network