Sue your ISP for DoS attack (was Re: [linux-elitists] dealing with Swen)
Karsten M. Self
Thu Sep 25 16:45:57 PDT 2003
on Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 04:02:29PM -0700, Don Marti (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> begin Karsten M. Self quotation of Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 11:40:49PM +0100:
> > I'm seriously considering suing my own ISP for a DoS attack. They can
> > pick this crap out and dump it. Why don't they?
> Isn't it a bad thing for ISPs to filter mail, though?
Specifically targeted, appropriately controlled, with consent of user,
and with effective measurees, no.
Viral payloads aren't *email*. They're DoS traffic.
In the case of AOL:
- The mail being blocked isn't viral or spam. It's being blocked
without prejudice simply based on IP of origin. Even if that IP has
no history in any of the major anti-spam listing services, including
all of those specifically listed by AOL.
- Subscribers, to the extent queried by me, were unaware of the
service change, have had no success in communicating the problem
though AOL's support channels, and generally have difficulty in
understanind what is being don,e wny, or how it affects them and
their legitimate correspondents.
- The service is not discretionary at the subscriber level. SMTP
rejection on connect is immediate and final. There is no knwon user
configuration to enable or disable this service on a per-user basis,
and the connection itself doesn't proceed to the level of being able
to specify intended receipt. Rejection occurs at IP connection,
prior to any SMTP protocol transaction.
- The effects of the blocking (mails accepted/blocked) are not
reported, or given the mechanism of the block, reportable, at a
per-user basis. There is no way to assess the impacts of the block
on a per-user basis. Ther is no way to assess whether the block
affects spam, ham, or unclassifiable mail. It is a point-blank
refusal of service.
Additionally: the reporting by Erin Joyce grossly misrepresented, and
directly misquoted me. Internet.com has failed to post my rebuttal
comments, and fails to respond to my email queries on the subject.
These are posted here:
A badly misrepresented presentation
Joyce butchered my comments, making me appear to be a spammer/bulk
mailer, and to be speaking on behalf of spammer, open-relay
maintainers, and commercial speach. I've just sent her and her
editor the following response, with a request it be posted as a
follow-up to her story.
Karsten M. Self <email@example.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
The Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act:
Feinstein's answer to Enron envy.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20030926/afc0f666/attachment.pgp
More information about the linux-elitists