Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

>> They don't discriminate, anyone can be a customer >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4GfoSZ_sDc > > Holy crap that girl was painful to listen to! missed the girl. all i saw was prince and a fox 'news' woman. it was pretty much like reading nanog. randy

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

On Thursday, July 28, 2016, Dovid Bender wrote: > The issue is that cloudfare in a way is generating their own market. If > the ddos sites weren't protected by cloudfare they would eat each other > alive. It's in their interest that their sites stay up so there is a need >

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

The issue is that cloudfare in a way is generating their own market. If the ddos sites weren't protected by cloudfare they would eat each other alive. It's in their interest that their sites stay up so there is a need for their service. When GoDaddy hosts a bad site they aren't causing customer

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

--- tknch...@gmail.com wrote: They don't discriminate, anyone can be a customer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4GfoSZ_sDc great quote from the reporter "why do you need a court order to do the right thing?" -- Holy crap that girl was painful to

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

On Thursday, July 28, 2016, Donn Lasher via NANOG wrote: > On 7/28/16, 10:17 AM, "NANOG on behalf of J. Oquendo" < > nanog-boun...@nanog.org on behalf of joque...@e-fensive.net > > wrote: > > > >While many are chanting: #NetworkLivesMatter, I have

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 7:30 PM, Donn Lasher via NANOG wrote: > > On 7/28/16, 10:17 AM, "NANOG on behalf of J. Oquendo" > wrote: > > >> While many are chanting: #NetworkLivesMatter, I have yet >> to see, read, or

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 7:30 PM, Donn Lasher via NANOG wrote: > > On 7/28/16, 10:17 AM, "NANOG on behalf of J. Oquendo" > wrote: > > >> While many are chanting: #NetworkLivesMatter, I have yet >> to see, read, or

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

On 7/28/16, 10:17 AM, "NANOG on behalf of J. Oquendo" wrote: >While many are chanting: #NetworkLivesMatter, I have yet >to see, read, or hear about any network provider being >the first to set precedence by either de-peering, or

Root Zone DNSSEC Operational Update -- ZSK length change

As you may know, Verisign, in its role as the Root Zone Maintainer is also the operator of the root zone Zone Signing Key (ZSK). Later this year, we will increase the size of the ZSK from 1024-bits to 2048-bits. The root zone ZSK is normally rolled every calendar quarter, as per our “DNSSEC

RE: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

The difference between everyone posting here and for example the intellectual property folks like RIAA is the latter has organization and money. As I said earlier one thing that organization and money has done is defined, with some precision, where the boundaries are. It's a moving target but

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

On 7/28/16 12:01, McDonald Richards wrote: Feel free to demonstrate to us all how you're leading by example. Until then, as a consumer of "the Internet", I'd like my any-to-any access to remain that way. Again, and that's why these problems are such as they are. ~Seth

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

>> Actually, as someone pointed out, it might well be conspiracy - which >> is criminal. > looking forward to the court case, if it's really important it'll > happen shortly, right? we don't need no flippin' court. we can lynch 'em right here.

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016, Stephen Satchell wrote: > Let's supposed someone did indeed de-peer or otherwise block Cloudflare > from their entire network. > > Which of y'all would be the first to say to that network operator, "Hope > you enjoy your intranet"? Really? Again more boogeyman nonsense.

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

Feel free to demonstrate to us all how you're leading by example. Until then, as a consumer of "the Internet", I'd like my any-to-any access to remain that way. On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > On 7/28/16 11:24, McDonald Richards wrote: > >> Be

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

On 7/28/16 11:24, McDonald Richards wrote: Be sure to let us all know how this works out for your business. And that's why these problems are such as they are. ~Seth

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

On 07/28/2016 10:17 AM, J. Oquendo wrote: While many are chanting: #NetworkLivesMatter, I have yet to see, read, or hear about any network provider being the first to set precedence by either de-peering, or blocking traffic from Cloudflare. There is a lot of keyboard posturing: "I am mad and I

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016, McDonald Richards wrote: > Be sure to let us all know how this works out for your business. > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 10:35 AM, J. Oquendo wrote: > As stated... "Networkers don't give a rats ass about ethics/morals. Solely a fistful of dollars"

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

Be sure to let us all know how this works out for your business. On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 10:35 AM, J. Oquendo wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016, Naslund, Steve wrote: > > > You obviously have a much shorter Internet memory than some of the > engineers on here that have had a

Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016, Naslund, Steve wrote: > You obviously have a much shorter Internet memory than some of the engineers > on here that have had a long history of killing off and blacklisting various > spam and malware operations over the years. I think the one thing that has > changed is

RE: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

You obviously have a much shorter Internet memory than some of the engineers on here that have had a long history of killing off and blacklisting various spam and malware operations over the years. I think the one thing that has changed is that the service providers are now large corporate

Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks

While many are chanting: #NetworkLivesMatter, I have yet to see, read, or hear about any network provider being the first to set precedence by either de-peering, or blocking traffic from Cloudflare. There is a lot of keyboard posturing: "I am mad and I am not going to take it anymore" hooplah but

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

On 7/28/16 11:56 AM, Niels Bakker wrote: * mfidel...@meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman) [Thu 28 Jul 2016, 17:42 CEST]: [...] Now if Cloudflare were to actively suggest that folks use vBooter to test systems, as a way to boost sales for Cloudflare - that would certainly be an interesting test

RE: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

The best analogy to real world would be to look at CloudFare as an arms dealer. They don't start the war but they sure enable it. The governments probably don't care who you sell arms to until their goat gets gored and then they are coming for you. Believe me they have more than enough laws

RE: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

No, as I said earlier, I am of the opinion that these networks get swept up once they go too big and hit something that law enforcement really cares about (read: embarrassed by). At that point they get everyone. You and I and our customers can't do much of anything until that point unless the

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

Are you of the opinion that the victim of a DDoS attack who is not a multi-billion-dollar corporation would actually receive help from the FBI as a result of a DDoS attack? In the past, I have been told that the dollar-threshold for the FBI to even consider looking at a case was at least $2M in

RE: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

It is not beyond the realm of law enforcement to run down the entire chain of events all the way back to the “whodunit” and “howdunit”. It is pretty amazing what they can figure out when they put their minds to it and don’t underestimate what they can learn by getting someone in the hot seat

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

They don't discriminate, anyone can be a customer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4GfoSZ_sDc great quote from the reporter "why do you need a court order to do the right thing?" On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Phil Rosenthal wrote: > Keep in mind also, the victims of these

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

Keep in mind also, the victims of these DDoS attacks do not know which "booter" service was paid to attack them. The packets do not have "Stress test provided by vBooter" in them. The attack packets do not come from the booter's or Cloudflare's IP addresses, they come from secondary victims --

RE: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

Miles is right. Their thinly veiled "stress tester" thing is not going to be much of a defense. They must not have very good legal counsel. Here is the issue. Stress testing is perfectly legal as long as I am: a) Stress testing my own stuff b) Stress testing your stuff WITH

RE: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

There are not international cyber crime laws because there is no international law enforcement agency with the reach to enforce them and because most countries like things like sovereignty. There is also an inherent conflict between private citizen hacking and state sponsored hacking and the

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

* mfidel...@meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman) [Thu 28 Jul 2016, 17:42 CEST]: [...] Now if Cloudflare were to actively suggest that folks use vBooter to test systems, as a way to boost sales for Cloudflare - that would certainly be an interesting test case for RICO CloudFlare is doing nothing

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

On 7/28/16 11:04 AM, Paras Jha wrote: Nothing is going to happen. Cloudflare will continue to turn a blind eye towards abusive customers, and even downright allow customers to HTTP scan from their network without batting an eyelash. The mere act of scanning isn't illegal, but it shows the kind

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

Sigh, another long thread that goes nowhere in the end and simply dies a dull dead. So let's add my 2ct donation into it. First of all, CF like any other carrier/provider/hoster/whatever only cares about the bucks, nothing else, you all do to, so that should be clear enough. Them actually booting

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

On Wednesday 27 July 2016 07:58:49 Paras Jha wrote: > Hi Justin, > > I have submitted abuse reports in the past, maybe from 2014 - 2015, but I > gave up after I consistently did not even get replies and saw no action > being taken. It is the same behavior with other providers who host malware >

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 03:09:51PM +, Steve Mikulasik wrote: > I am sure a lawyer would see it very differently, [...] For what it's worth I agree, but I'm not an attorney (and neither are most of us), so I'll write from the perspective of an operator. The healthy functioning of the Internet

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

Nothing is going to happen. Cloudflare will continue to turn a blind eye towards abusive customers, and even downright allow customers to HTTP scan from their network without batting an eyelash. The mere act of scanning isn't illegal, but it shows the kind of mindset that they have.

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

I'm sorry, but this entire discussion is predicated on half-truths and nonsense spewing out of the CF team. It's a shame too, as they're usually great community minded folks who are well respected around here. No matter how you define the CloudFlare service, that they can claim ignorance due to

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

If you believe someone is doing something illegal than you should report it to law enforcement. Their job is to investigate and bring charges if they feel they are warranted. You do not have to be from the USA to report a crime in the USA. Here is a list with contact info for the FBI's

RE: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

A DDoS attack is illegal. In the United States it is considered as theft of service. The legal construct used is that the DDoS attack is a theft of CPU cycles, compute resources, and power by other than the rightful owner for its intended purposes. Steven Naslund Chicago IL -Original

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

Well, I do not think feeding the trolls is a good exercise for a representative of any company that is taking this subject seriously. Don't you think? - Alain Hebertaheb...@pubnix.net PubNIX Inc. 50 boul. St-Charles P.O. Box 26770

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

@Baldur "They just lost all respect from here. Would someone from USA please report these guys to the feds? What they are doing is outright criminal." I'm happy to put you in touch with an FBI agent if you have questions or concerns you'd like to discuss. Justin Paine Head of Trust

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 12:00:00 +0200, Baldur Norddahl said: > DDoS attacks using stolen resources and fake identities is not legal Are you making a blanket statement that covers all jurisdictions on the planet? For bonus points - is it more like "illegal as in murder", or "illegal as in

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

On 28 July 2016 at 11:30, wrote: > In general, the conspiracy isn't criminal if the conspired act isn't > criminal. > If you're trying to make a criminal conspiracy out of non-criminal acts, > your best bet is probably finding a new way to abuse the RICO statutes. >

Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 22:55:54 -0400, Miles Fidelman said: > On 7/27/16 10:48 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > >> They just lost all respect from here. Would someone from USA please > >> report these guys to the feds? What they are doing is outright > >> criminal. > > hyperbole. it is not criminal. you