On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 08:00:00AM +0200, Piotr Kasztelowicz wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Alex Pennace wrote:
>
> > Can you please get over this? The evidence you posted last year was
> > flawed, it did not link ORBS to a few probes from Romania. You have no
> > proof that ORBS is somehow worse than any other list of IPs.
>
> 1) My host was by me secured (qmail+tcpserver with no open relay)
> but A. Brown hasn't removed me form his list
So tell us your IP and show it is being listed by ORBS, so we can see
for ourselves if this is true.
> 2) The hacking proof was repeated each time, when tester was active
> with performing with test
Ofcourse.
> 3) Each hacker can read and such list are for his the great
> direction, where seek. Problem was, that in this time this
> server was already secured and all was written to logs
No, not each hacker can read the list. Only hosts that have been
relays for over 30 days get in a publicly-available list, because
relays that stay open that long probably will never get fixed.
> 4) With A. Brown was no discussion. I have asked him to break
> test but he has me adviced to turn off my server
ORBS can be configured to 'ignore' your netblock, and I've never seen
Alan be unwilling to do so for anybody.
> 5) I have blocked my server with command to tcpserver
> "=.nl:deny" and since this time all hacking proof
> has been finished and no longer has been reported.
> Since this time all problems with them has been finished
The ORBS tester does not have a reverse that ends in .nl.
> I'm very happy thaht NZ Court has been this same opinion
> as I.
You are also confused about the courtcase, apparently.
Greetz, Peter.
