On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:56:57AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > Philipp Schulte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > >>>On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 12:35:27PM -0800, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > >>>>Philipp Schulte wrote: > >>>>>But what kind of pressure can $your_provider put on a portscanner > >>>>>from $evil_provider? > >>>> > >>>>Domain-level blocking of...mail, news, DNS.... > [...] > >If you say that portscanning isn't necessariy evil, how can you > >suggest "Domain-level blocking of...mail, news, DNS...."? > > Hmm. You asked "what kind of pressure can [my provider] put on [evil > guy's provider]", and Karsten answered - that is indeed the sort of > pressure one provider can put on another (RBL [1], UDP [2], etc.). Your > question wasn't about what kind of pressure providers *should* put on > each other, or about portscanning in particular, and I didn't read the > answer that way.
No, that's not what I asked. I was not talking about pressure on an other provider but pressure on a customer of an other provider. Makes a difference to me. I also wrote: "Show me the ISP that is willing to take these steps because of a portscanning script-kiddie. portsanning is not even illegal here in Germany." It just doesn't make sense to me to complain about some portscanner at _my_ provider. Since my provider is a university I know that they wouldn't be happy if I bug them with logfiles. If portscanning is not even illegal, how can I expect my provider to take steps against it? But the other guy's provider might have prohibited that in their contract with their customers so they can ban this portscanner. Phil
