On Friday 31 October 2003 09:38 pm, HaywireMac wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:17:50 -0500
Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
The answer however, is not to reject everything out of hand and adopt
the position that no law can be useful.
Unless you recognize that laws *create disorder*
On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 09:40:51 -0500
Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Cute little sayings like this are relatively meaningless to me.
Anarchy would be far worse for all of us than even over-the-top
government. Laws are an absolute necessity without which there can be
no social
On Saturday 01 November 2003 09:55 am, HaywireMac wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 09:40:51 -0500
Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Cute little sayings like this are relatively meaningless to me.
Anarchy would be far worse for all of us than even over-the-top
government. Laws are an
On Sat, 2003-11-01 at 11:19, Margot wrote:
HaywireMac wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 16:50:10 +
Graham Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
boys,
that should be singular. I didn't call anyone's opinion shrill,
silly, or other such things. Up to that point it was a fairly civil
Aronsmith wrote:
On Sat, 2003-11-01 at 11:19, Margot wrote:
HaywireMac wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 16:50:10 +
Graham Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
boys,
that should be singular. I didn't call anyone's opinion shrill,
silly, or other such things. Up to that point it was a fairly civil
On Sat, 2003-11-01 at 12:07, Margot wrote:
Aronsmith wrote:
On Sat, 2003-11-01 at 11:19, Margot wrote:
HaywireMac wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 16:50:10 +
Graham Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
boys,
that should be singular. I didn't call anyone's opinion shrill,
silly,
--- Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thursday 30 October 2003 10:24 am, Ralph Slooten
wrote:
With the tarpit, you rig your mail server to accept
the connection attempt but
then receive the traffic e v e r s os
l o w l y,
What about the legal
On Friday 31 October 2003 08:40 am, Tango Echo wrote:
--- Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thursday 30 October 2003 10:24 am, Ralph Slooten
wrote:
With the tarpit, you rig your mail server to accept
the connection attempt but
then receive the traffic e v e r s o
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 08:53:00 -0500
Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
You actually think that a spammer is going to take you to court and
argue to the judge, Your Honor, I was attempting to access a computer
resource without proper authorization and it didn't respond as quickly
as I
--- Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Friday 31 October 2003 08:40 am, Tango Echo
wrote:
What about the legal consequences of using a tar
pit?
I can't possibly see what kind of legal consequences
could follow. Someone is
connecting to your server voluntarily and using your
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 06:17:25 -0800 (PST)
Tango Echo [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
I would suggest that you look into the
legality of having an operating network tarpit in your
state.
Tarpit? What tarpit? Oh, was my computer doing that? I had n idea!
LOL!
--
HaywireMac ++ ICQ # 279518458
On Friday 31 October 2003 09:17 am, Tango Echo wrote:
Yes, I do actually. Bryan, your problem is you are too
rational =). In this upside down world we live in, and
an even more more upside down US legal system (plz, no
OT flames) anything is possible. I've heard of cases
where a theif fell
On Friday 31 October 2003 09:17 am, Tango Echo wrote:
Ah! Here is the reference: http://www.hackbusters.net
While it's possible it may deal directly with his
LaBrea tar pit program, it appears to hinge around the
tar pit technology. Here's a quote from the site:
Quote:
This section of the
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 10:57:04 -0500
Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
The fact is that tortured readings of laws and paranoid ravings about
the possible clueless applications of laws does not do the tech
community any service. It makes us all appear to be unreasonable and
unwilling to
Ah! Here is the reference:
http://www.hackbusters.net
While it's possible it may deal directly with his
LaBrea tar pit program, it appears to hinge around
the
tar pit technology. Here's a quote from the site:
Quote:
This section of the Illinois Criminal Code was
added
on
On Friday 31 October 2003 11:29 am, HaywireMac wrote:
Relying on politicians and lawyers to protect us has never served us
well in the past, I see no reason to expect anything different for the
future.
The answer however, is not to reject everything out of hand and adopt the
position that no
On Friday 31 October 2003 11:38 am, Tango Echo wrote:
Well, I am not a resident of Illinois, therefore,
this particular criminal
code does not apply to me.
Good, but you might want to check these states too:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/states/
I might check the laws, not someone's
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 05:40:27 -0800 (PST)
Tango Echo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about the legal consequences of using a tar pit?
Seems I remember reading something about that several
months back... Or perhaps they were just questioning
it becuause the TP acted as some kind of DoS attack
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 10:57:04 -0500
Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
This response actually brings up something that has been bugging me of
late about some elements of the tech community. I realize that there
are a large number of clueless politicians and lawyers out there but
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:17:50 -0500
Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
The answer however, is not to reject everything out of hand and adopt
the position that no law can be useful.
Unless you recognize that laws *create disorder* ;-)
The more laws and order are made prominent, the more
On Friday 31 October 2003 06:38 pm, HaywireMac wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:17:50 -0500
Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
The answer however, is not to reject everything out of hand and
adopt the position that no law can be useful.
Unless you recognize that laws *create disorder*
Bryan Phinney wrote:
On Friday 31 October 2003 09:17 am, Tango Echo wrote:
Yes, I do actually. Bryan, your problem is you are too
rational =). In this upside down world we live in, and
an even more more upside down US legal system (plz, no
OT flames) anything is possible. I've heard of cases
Hiya group,
I run my own private SMTP server for my mail, and just checking in the logs I
realised that these spam-ridden ISP's are trying to use me as a relay. They
fortunately aren't succeeding as I'm getting things like this:
Oct 30 15:14:54 axljab postfix/smtpd[27285]: connect from
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 18:25:36 +
Richard Urwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And what a surprise, KorNET, the biggest wankers of 'em all but still,
I have many many more, and not only from KorNEt but also knows
spammer-ridden ISP's like China Net.
In my experience, china9988 gives up
On Thursday 30 Oct 2003 7:14 pm, Ralph Slooten wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 18:25:36 +
Richard Urwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And what a surprise, KorNET, the biggest wankers of 'em all but
still, I have many many more, and not only from KorNEt but also knows
spammer-ridden ISP's
On Thursday 30 October 2003 10:24 am, Ralph Slooten wrote:
Does anyone know where I can find such information, to ease my troubles?
;-) I need to find out the full ip-ranges of certain ISP's.
You can get ranges from whois if you really want them. However, you appear to
have the opportunity
26 matches
Mail list logo
