On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 08:38:43PM +0000, Pollywog wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 21:18:34 +0100, Philipp Schulte said: > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:04:20PM +0100, Robert Waldner wrote: > > > > > >Shouldn't this be <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>? > > > > > > No, $yourproviders complaint is _much_ more likely to be taken > > > seriously by $attackers_provider (and it can save you from a lot of > > > embarassment if you´d misjudge something). > > > > > > In other words: you have a better stand at $yourprovider cause it´s him > > > your money goes to. > > > > But what kind of pressure can $your_provider put on a portscanner from > > $evil_provider? > > None, and they probably won't do anything. They have their own customers > who cause problems to deal with. I report abusers directly to their ISP > and I often get results; the ISP informs me that the customer was told not > to do it again or their account was closed.
That's exactly what I am talking about! But Robert thinks it is better to talk to my provider, which doesn't make much sense to me. I would talk to the attacker's ISP, too. Phil
