Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Nick Hilliard]

Carlos Friaças wrote on 01/04/2019 18:06:

<< Here you might have forgot to comment about "weaponized IXPs" :-) >>


Hi Carlos,

No, this was deliberate.  I didn't comment because a lot of people are 
throwing analogies into this discussion which aren't directly relevant 
to 2019-03.  If you want to discuss IXP abuse and why it's not directly 
relevant to this proposal, let's do that offline.


Nick

[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03

[FERREIRA DE OLIVEIRA Edgar (RIC-CH)]

I support 2019-03

Regards,
Edgar Oliveira

© 2019 Richemont International SA. All Rights Reserved
The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - please do 
not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use of the addressee(s) 
only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
review, reliance, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication may 
be prohibited by law and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
it and all copies (including attachments) from your system.

[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03

[GEANTY Damien (RIC-CH)]

I support 2019-03.

Regards,

Damien Geanty
Cyber Specialist | Richemont International SA



Chemin de la Chênaie 50 | CP30 | 1293 Bellevue, Genève | Switzerland
(tel) +41227213000 | (direct) +41225811161 | (mobile) +41791385643
(email) damien.gea...@richemont.com



© 2019 Richemont International SA. All Rights Reserved
The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - please do 
not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use of the addressee(s) 
only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
review, reliance, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication may 
be prohibited by law and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
it and all copies (including attachments) from your system.

[anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03

[MATASCI Andrea (RIC-CH)]

I support 2019-03

© 2019 Richemont International SA. All Rights Reserved
The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - please do 
not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use of the addressee(s) 
only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
review, reliance, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication may 
be prohibited by law and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
it and all copies (including attachments) from your system.

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03

[Hank Nussbacher]

On 02/04/2019 18:48, GEANTY Damien (RIC-CH) wrote:

To the moderators,

It could be that numerous people just don't want to get sucked up into 
an endless discussion about the pros and cons of this proposal and just 
want to weigh in with their feelings about whether they support the 
proposal or not.


Regards,
Hank


I support 2019-03.

Regards,

Damien Geanty
Cyber Specialist | Richemont International SA



Chemin de la Chênaie 50 | CP30 | 1293 Bellevue, Genève | Switzerland
(tel) +41227213000 | (direct) +41225811161 | (mobile) +41791385643
(email) damien.gea...@richemont.com 


© 2019 Richemont International SA. All Rights Reserved
The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - 
please do not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use 
of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you 
are hereby notified that any review, reliance, disclosure, 
distribution or copying of this communication may be prohibited by law 
and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete it and 
all copies (including attachments) from your system.

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Ronald F. Guilmette]

In message 
, 
Jacob Slater  wrote:

>If a NCC member is actively and willfully, after having been notified and
>given ample opportunity to resolve the issue, engaged in widespread
>hijacking such that RIR/NIR members have complained about their ability to
>use their own resources, yes.

I don't see why that last part should even be a considration.

Who cares whether or not some RIR members has complained about "their
inability to use their own resources"?  Theft is theft.

{re: ALS Scan v. Cloudflare}
>That case has nothing at all to do with the theft OF IP ADDRESSES, and thus,
>> it is rather entirely irrelevant to this discussion.
>>
>The case does deal with the slippery slope argument in that it demonstrates
>at least one instance of modern law where removing content from an online
>service (at all) resulted in an opening for legal liability.

Wait.  So are you suggestng that the discontinuance of Cloudflare caching
for some pirate porn sites -created- a lgeal liability for those sites
where none had existed before?  If so, then you're going to have to explain
that to me very very slowly.

>... Action should be well
>backed with evidence.

We agree.

>Cloudflare's blog post on the subject has comments on the matter. One of
>their staff members is known for stating "Is this the day the Internet
>dies?",

Yes, well, as far as Cloudflare is concerned, -anything- that stands in the
way of them doing absolutely anything, and whatever the f**k they want,
MUST necessarily be the End Of The World As We Know It.  It would not be
wise for anyone to take any of Cloudflare's ludicrous hyperbole seriously,
especially while they are, one the one hand, -selling- DDoS protection,
even as they are also -providing- DDoS protection to DDoS gerenation
services... as they routinely do, and as they routinely claim it is their
God-given right to do (e.g. www.0x-booter.pw).

>... a reference to the fact that they acknowledge they (at the time)
>were about to take content offline for what were non-required reasons.

I, for one, would like to know just what in the hell Cloudflare considers
to be "required reasons" for them ceasing their HTTP reverse proxy service
to some particular FQDN.  As far as I have been able to tell, over the
years, Cloudflare has been very insistant that there are -no- reasons that
would -ever- require them to cease providing services, even to terrorist
and child porn sites... at least nothing shourt of an outright court order.

But this is all a digression from the issue here, which is just 2019-03,
a proposal that only deals with the use and misuse of Internet number
resources, PERIOD.

>Getting depeered by transits, losing IX memberships, and having gear seized
>by authorities all seem like potential disincentives. Having a bunch of
>NCC-allocated IP space doesn't matter when you are unable to use it.

I refer you again to the unescapable fact that, even as we speak, the
company called Universal IP solution Corp. is still a RIPE member in good
standing.  It is lying low, for now, but could be back in business and
undertaking new hijacks -tomorrow-, all with the air of perfect legitimacy
which is conferred upon it by its ongoing formal RIPE membership.


Regards,
rfg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Luis Morais]

I support 2019-03

Luís Morais


On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:32 PM Ronald F. Guilmette 
wrote:

>
> In message  7hvmbndo92qh0q8i...@mail.gmail.com>,
> Jacob Slater  wrote:
>
> >If a NCC member is actively and willfully, after having been notified and
> >given ample opportunity to resolve the issue, engaged in widespread
> >hijacking such that RIR/NIR members have complained about their ability to
> >use their own resources, yes.
>
> I don't see why that last part should even be a considration.
>
> Who cares whether or not some RIR members has complained about "their
> inability to use their own resources"?  Theft is theft.
>
> {re: ALS Scan v. Cloudflare}
> >That case has nothing at all to do with the theft OF IP ADDRESSES, and
> thus,
> >> it is rather entirely irrelevant to this discussion.
> >>
> >The case does deal with the slippery slope argument in that it
> demonstrates
> >at least one instance of modern law where removing content from an online
> >service (at all) resulted in an opening for legal liability.
>
> Wait.  So are you suggestng that the discontinuance of Cloudflare caching
> for some pirate porn sites -created- a lgeal liability for those sites
> where none had existed before?  If so, then you're going to have to explain
> that to me very very slowly.
>
> >... Action should be well
> >backed with evidence.
>
> We agree.
>
> >Cloudflare's blog post on the subject has comments on the matter. One of
> >their staff members is known for stating "Is this the day the Internet
> >dies?",
>
> Yes, well, as far as Cloudflare is concerned, -anything- that stands in the
> way of them doing absolutely anything, and whatever the f**k they want,
> MUST necessarily be the End Of The World As We Know It.  It would not be
> wise for anyone to take any of Cloudflare's ludicrous hyperbole seriously,
> especially while they are, one the one hand, -selling- DDoS protection,
> even as they are also -providing- DDoS protection to DDoS gerenation
> services... as they routinely do, and as they routinely claim it is their
> God-given right to do (e.g. www.0x-booter.pw).
>
> >... a reference to the fact that they acknowledge they (at the time)
> >were about to take content offline for what were non-required reasons.
>
> I, for one, would like to know just what in the hell Cloudflare considers
> to be "required reasons" for them ceasing their HTTP reverse proxy service
> to some particular FQDN.  As far as I have been able to tell, over the
> years, Cloudflare has been very insistant that there are -no- reasons that
> would -ever- require them to cease providing services, even to terrorist
> and child porn sites... at least nothing shourt of an outright court order.
>
> But this is all a digression from the issue here, which is just 2019-03,
> a proposal that only deals with the use and misuse of Internet number
> resources, PERIOD.
>
> >Getting depeered by transits, losing IX memberships, and having gear
> seized
> >by authorities all seem like potential disincentives. Having a bunch of
> >NCC-allocated IP space doesn't matter when you are unable to use it.
>
> I refer you again to the unescapable fact that, even as we speak, the
> company called Universal IP solution Corp. is still a RIPE member in good
> standing.  It is lying low, for now, but could be back in business and
> undertaking new hijacks -tomorrow-, all with the air of perfect legitimacy
> which is conferred upon it by its ongoing formal RIPE membership.
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
>
>
>

[anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03

[TRAILL Neville (RIC-US)]

Dear RIPE NCC

I support 2019-03.

Neville Traill
Cyber Specialist | Richemont North America, Inc.



3 Enterprise Drive | Shelton CT 06484 | United States
(tel) +12039256400 | (direct) +18177852548
(email) neville.tra...@richemont.com



(c) 2019 Richemont North America, Inc.. All Rights Reserved
The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - please do 
not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use of the addressee(s) 
only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
review, reliance, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication may 
be prohibited by law and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
it and all copies (including attachments) from your system.

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03

[Isabel Strijland]

How can I unsibscribe to this??? The e-mails are driving me crazy.

Von meinem iPhone gesendet

Am 02.04.2019 um 20:07 schrieb TRAILL Neville (RIC-US) 
mailto:neville.tra...@richemont.com>>:

Dear RIPE NCC

I support 2019-03.

Neville Traill
Cyber Specialist | Richemont North America, Inc.



3 Enterprise Drive | Shelton CT 06484 | United States
(tel) +12039256400 | (direct) +18177852548
(email) neville.tra...@richemont.com



© 2019 Richemont North America, Inc.. All Rights Reserved
The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - please do 
not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use of the addressee(s) 
only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
review, reliance, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication may 
be prohibited by law and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
it and all copies (including attachments) from your system.

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03

[Fi Shing]

See at the bottom of the website:https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg


 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03
From: Isabel Strijland 
Date: Wed, April 03, 2019 5:13 am
To: "TRAILL Neville (RIC-US)" 
Cc: "anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net" 

 How can I unsibscribe to this??? The e-mails are driving me crazy.  Von meinem iPhone gesendet  Am 02.04.2019 um 20:07 schrieb TRAILL Neville (RIC-US) :Dear RIPE NCC   I support 2019-03.   Neville Traill Cyber Specialist | Richemont North America, Inc.3 Enterprise Drive | Shelton CT 06484 | United States (tel) +12039256400 | (direct) +18177852548 (email) neville.tra...@richemont.com     © 2019 Richemont North America, Inc.. All Rights Reserved  The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - please do not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, reliance, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication may be prohibited by law and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete it and all copies (including attachments) from your system.  

[anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03

[furio ercolessi]

Me too.

Furio Ercolessi

[anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03

[HUEN Jason (RIC-HK)]

I support 2019-03

(c) 2019 Richemont Asia Pacific Ltd. All Rights Reserved
The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - please do 
not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use of the addressee(s) 
only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
review, reliance, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication may 
be prohibited by law and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
it and all copies (including attachments) from your system.

[anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03

[FONG Eddie (RIC-HK)]

I support 2019-03

Eddie Fong
CYBER SPECIALIST | Richemont Asia Pacific Ltd



909 Cheung Sha Wan Road | Kowloon | Hong Kong
(direct) +85225322912
(email) eddie-ht.f...@richemont.com



(c) 2019 Richemont Asia Pacific Ltd. All Rights Reserved
The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - please do 
not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use of the addressee(s) 
only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
review, reliance, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication may 
be prohibited by law and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
it and all copies (including attachments) from your system.