Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
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.
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 07:59:38AM +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 That's a valid complaint. 2) The hacking proof was repeated each time, when tester was active with performing with test The ORBS tester is not engaging in any form of computer trespass. If you don't want people connecting to your SMTP service, take steps to remove it from the public Internet. 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 Publishing a list of IPs is not a crime. 4) With A. Brown was no discussion. I have asked him to break test but he has me adviced to turn off my server Interesting. 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 I'm very happy thaht NZ Court has been this same opinion as I. The NZ court action has nothing to do with computer trespass if I'm not mistaken.
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: So tell us your IP and show it is being listed by ORBS, so we can see for ourselves if this is true. Now it is not possible, because the ORBS is closed The host is sun.lodz.ptkardio.pl [212.51.193.152] relays that stay open that long probably will never get fixed. Since September 2000 relay open has been fixed by me on Dane Bernstein software - qmail, tcpserver. A. Brown will not remove me from list. This is clear, that ORBS uses others, that objectives criteria. ORBS can be configured to 'ignore' your netblock, and I've never seen Alan be unwilling to do so for anybody. NZ Court, as we have heard don't let him do to. I'm the Vicepresident of Polish Medical Internet Society and this same work at security and quality of Polish medical servers. I work as consultant. My statement is clear. Each use SMTP on server, which don't lead to sent or receive mail without a permission of administrator should be taken as inappropriate activity and illegal by any law. I have made many such expertises and in each case do to the law effects. Therefore I don't wonder that NZ High Court take the injunction to remove ORBS list The ORBS tester does not have a reverse that ends in .nl. Dec 4 23:39:09 sun smtp: tcpserver: deny 29386 :212.51.193.152:25 relaytest.orbs.vuurwerk.nl:194.178.232.55::2991 As you can see netblock is effective. Best Wishes Piotr --- Piotr Kasztelowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
[OT] [useless thread] Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 01:29:59PM +0200, Piotr Kasztelowicz wrote: On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: Now it is not possible, because the ORBS is closed The host is sun.lodz.ptkardio.pl [212.51.193.152] relays that stay open that long probably will never get fixed. Since September 2000 relay open has been fixed by me on Dane Bernstein software - qmail, tcpserver. A. Brown will not remove me from list. This is clear, that ORBS uses others, that objectives criteria. You have shown us no proof. That you are unable to for external reasons is too bad, but I suggest that you do not claim the above until you can show us proof. NZ Court, as we have heard don't let him do to. I'm the Vicepresident of Polish Medical Internet Society and this same work at security and quality of Polish medical servers. I work as consultant. My statement So people *pay* you to do silly things like block all of .nl? [snip] The ORBS tester does not have a reverse that ends in .nl. Dec 4 23:39:09 sun smtp: tcpserver: deny 29386 :212.51.193.152:25 relaytest.orbs.vuurwerk.nl:194.178.232.55::2991 As you can see netblock is effective. It indeed effectively blocks .nl hosts. The orbs-tester, however, is not an .nl host. It was back in december, as you clearly demonstrate, but it isn't now. Greetz, Peter.
Re: [OT] [useless thread] Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: You have shown us no proof. That you are unable to for external reasons is too bad, but I suggest that you do not claim the above until you can show us proof. I don't believe you. Why I should believe you, when A. Brown has presented arrogant behavior to me? So people *pay* you to do silly things like block all of .nl? Post from .nl can be received thus secondaries MX - this works, test no. It indeed effectively blocks .nl hosts. The orbs-tester, however, is not an .nl host. It was back in december, as you clearly demonstrate, but it isn't now. If I have it find - I make block and send protest to Netherlands Embassy in Warsaw. I will say you again, the all activities, which you will perform on my server on port 25, which are not provided to send a post to any user on them is inappropriate using of this port and will be not permitted be me as server administrator. This depends all like ORBS systems, whose owners are participants of this list Piotr --- Piotr Kasztelowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
Re: [OT] [useless thread] Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
Can you guys please stop feeding this troll? --Adam
Re: [OT] [useless thread] Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 05:10:32PM +0200, Piotr Kasztelowicz wrote: On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: You have shown us no proof. That you are unable to for external reasons is too bad, but I suggest that you do not claim the above until you can show us proof. I don't believe you. Why I should believe you, when A. Brown has presented arrogant behavior to me? Please, please, everyone, let's not let this guy waste another week of the list members' time and energy! Doesn't anyone remember what happened when people tried rational arguments on this guy last time? AFAICT, he's simply a troll -- ignore him... -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 01:29:37PM +0200, Piotr Kasztelowicz wrote: Each use SMTP on server, which don't lead to sent or receive mail without a permission of administrator should be taken as inappropriate activity and illegal by any law. With that attitude you criminalize: 1. Incomplete SMTP transactions, 2. Poor slobs who load a web page with img src=http://yourhost:25; 3. People who are tracking down mail problems and connect to your SMTP service to check a few things. Your SMTP service isn't harmed by any of those.
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Johan Almqvist wrote: * Alex Pennace [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010601 04:25]: http://www.orbs.org/ says Due to circumstances beyond our control, the ORBS website is no longer available. http://www.dorkslayers.com/ seems to be the successor in some ways. But the first statement It is our intention to never list IP addresses which have any of the following characteristics: - a physical location within the United States of America (USA) [...] makes me wonder a bit... they just don't want to bother with lawsuits. - ask -- ask bjoern hansen, http://ask.netcetera.dk/ !try; do(); more than 100M impressions per day, http://valueclick.com
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Piotr Kasztelowicz wrote: [...] I'm very happy thaht NZ Court has been this same opinion as I. Well, they don't. The court didn't tell him to shut down ORBS, only to remove a few defamatory listings. - ask -- ask bjoern hansen, http://ask.netcetera.dk/ !try; do();
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: Furthermore, Alan Brown's activities are not illegal - the ORBS relaytester runs in The Netherlands, where this is not illegal by any law. Maybe in Netherlands is not illegal, but in Netherlands even euthanasia is legal by any law, in other countries not! The tester is in Netherlands but it otucomes follow results in other countries, where performing such lists and testing, which seeks the vulnerabilities in servers and helps hackers at attacks, is illegal. From corespondence on this list can be considered, that in US, NZ is illegal, in my country (Poland) too. So, if Netherland will be right to others, probably shall give this same injunction as NZ High Court - this want only a lot time Best Wishes Piotr --- Piotr Kasztelowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 09:17:28AM +0200, Piotr Kasztelowicz wrote: On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: Furthermore, Alan Brown's activities are not illegal - the ORBS relaytester runs in The Netherlands, where this is not illegal by any law. Maybe in Netherlands is not illegal, but in Netherlands even euthanasia is legal by any law, in other countries not! The tester is in Netherlands but it otucomes follow results in other countries, where performing such lists and testing, which seeks the vulnerabilities in servers and helps hackers at attacks, is illegal. From corespondence on this list can be considered, that in US, NZ is illegal, in my country (Poland) too. So, if Netherland will be right to others, probably shall give this same injunction as NZ High Court - this want only a lot time 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.
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 09:17:50AM +0200, Piotr Kasztelowicz allegedly wrote: On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: Furthermore, Alan Brown's activities are not illegal - the ORBS relaytester runs in The Netherlands, where this is not illegal by any law. Maybe in Netherlands is not illegal, but in Netherlands even euthanasia is legal by any law, in other countries not! The tester is in Netherlands but it otucomes follow results in other countries, where performing such lists and testing, which seeks the vulnerabilities in servers and helps hackers at attacks, is illegal. From corespondence on this list can be considered, that in US, NZ is illegal, in my country (Poland) too. So, if Netherland will be right to others, probably shall give this same injunction as NZ High Court - this want only a lot time I'm confused. Isn't the use of ORBS entirely voluntary? I don't see how any site on the Internet is obliged to accept any traffic at all. So, if a site chooses to reject traffic based on a list - regardless of how flawed it may be - what's the big deal? But I fail see the relevance to qmail... Regards.
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
Besides, ORBS is dead! http://www.orbs.org/ Or, is that the wrong site? David Mark wrote: On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 09:17:50AM +0200, Piotr Kasztelowicz allegedly wrote: On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: Furthermore, Alan Brown's activities are not illegal - the ORBS relaytester runs in The Netherlands, where this is not illegal by any law. Maybe in Netherlands is not illegal, but in Netherlands even euthanasia is legal by any law, in other countries not! The tester is in Netherlands but it otucomes follow results in other countries, where performing such lists and testing, which seeks the vulnerabilities in servers and helps hackers at attacks, is illegal. From corespondence on this list can be considered, that in US, NZ is illegal, in my country (Poland) too. So, if Netherland will be right to others, probably shall give this same injunction as NZ High Court - this want only a lot time I'm confused. Isn't the use of ORBS entirely voluntary? I don't see how any site on the Internet is obliged to accept any traffic at all. So, if a site chooses to reject traffic based on a list - regardless of how flawed it may be - what's the big deal? But I fail see the relevance to qmail... Regards.
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
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 2) The hacking proof was repeated each time, when tester was active with performing with test 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 4) With A. Brown was no discussion. I have asked him to break test but he has me adviced to turn off my server 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 I'm very happy thaht NZ Court has been this same opinion as I. Piotr --- Piotr Kasztelowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 05:06:52PM -0400, David Means wrote: Besides, ORBS is dead! http://www.orbs.org/ Or, is that the wrong site? That is the right site, and ORBS is indeed currently dead. Greetz, Peter.
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
Hello Alan Brown, operator of ORBS, was served 2 New Zealand High Court injunctions ordering the removal of several OBRS listings. The compalies who filed for these injunctions are Actrix and NZ Telecom. I have written to this list one year ago, Allan Brown activity is illegal, moreover hi helps hackers more than normal peoples. Also good decision of NZ Court. Piotr --- Piotr Kasztelowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 11:25:10AM +, Piotr Kasztelowicz wrote: Hello Alan Brown, operator of ORBS, was served 2 New Zealand High Court injunctions ordering the removal of several OBRS listings. The compalies who filed for these injunctions are Actrix and NZ Telecom. I have written to this list one year ago, Allan Brown activity is illegal, moreover hi helps hackers more than normal peoples. Also good decision of NZ Court. I hate starting a flamethread (and hope you all are smart enough not to), but ORBS does not help hackers. Furthermore, Alan Brown's activities are not illegal - the ORBS relaytester runs in The Netherlands, where this is not illegal by any law. Greetz, Peter.
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
* Alex Pennace [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010601 04:25]: http://www.orbs.org/ says Due to circumstances beyond our control, the ORBS website is no longer available. http://www.dorkslayers.com/ seems to be the successor in some ways. But the first statement It is our intention to never list IP addresses which have any of the following characteristics: - a physical location within the United States of America (USA) [...] makes me wonder a bit... -Johan -- Johan Almqvist http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/ PGP signature
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Alex Pennace wrote: http://www.orbs.org/ says Due to circumstances beyond our control, the ORBS website is no longer available. That seems pretty abrupt. Anyone know why they vanished? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6 iQEVAwUBOxdEQ71ZYOtSwT+tAQH2cAgAg1ScHjgE6LLgiSirhqf+P8MvWBUR++Gk YcHOXAuB9t0wyA1dmfFmL/9Id1Lz54euavDrZsZ22+ikqhd3ov+uPPzTsP5vdE8l tFwNTHugvIEKzwH0fxsyu/3sujeO/B3oCnfX13e0NaGTq1x8V8SFYw9Qt7GjOVz+ x+AL0cvYEB1+FAPY8TiEMbHG13BV0fcOKn3YTeSlCdDA4bmcsRhx5ChIrHO3nmQB M9ZCoMYFEfN46fVSE3ygSj0/CdgC52oxh8aeHb969G3OEOOeHeG2GFK71pxg1+Zs EkaU91OYAj17FpmHZR358LUQ2p5ianaNK4kYYgghPsaUtiLxIOxa9A== =AdHz -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
* David Talkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010601 09:29]: Alex Pennace wrote: http://www.orbs.org/ says Due to circumstances beyond our control, the ORBS website is no longer available. That seems pretty abrupt. Anyone know why they vanished? legalese Alan Brown, operator of ORBS, was served 2 New Zealand High Court injunctions ordering the removal of several OBRS listings. The compalies who filed for these injunctions are Actrix and NZ Telecom. /legalese http://groups.google.com/groups?q=news.admin.net-abuse.email -Johan -- Johan Almqvist http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/ PGP signature
