Uh. You posted on Twitter. The most trusted name in [?]
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 12:17 AM, John Bambenek <bambe...@gmail.com> wrote: > We'll take data from **Trusted** sources. > > I'm just not going to take a public open mailing list post as evidence at > this point. > > > chris rollin wrote: > >> Shon wrote: >> >> Seth, >> >> >> >>> I said it could be, not that it is. Thanks for pointing that out. >>> However, >>> >>> >> I >> >> >>> believe the reason they are being blocked at AT&T is the main reason I >>> >>> >> supplied >> >> >>> on my first post. The DDoS attack issue is the main ticket here. >>> >>> >> >> The ACK storms arent coming from the 4chan servers >> It's just like the DNS attack (IN/NS/.). It points to the stupidity of >> AT&T >> uppers >> SANS: Are you or arent you soliciting data? I have some to confirm also >> >> >> >>> It's not >>> because of content, or to piss people off. It's to protect their network, >>> >>> >> as any >> >> >>> of you would do when you got DDoSed on your own networks. >>> >>> >> >> They are going to get some first hand experience in what Protecting their >> Network >> involves real soon, now. Blocking 4chan was an exercise in Stupidity >> >> >> >>> It's damage control, >>> >>> >> >> It's a damage challenge. >> >> >> >>> essentially, until they find out who is involved and block them, then >>> >>> >> they'll >> >> >>> likely lift the block. >>> >>> >> >> They don't have the right to do this. Not in their >> TOS/EULA/User-Agreement. >> Not in any sane legal forum. (I*A*AL) >> >> >> >>> This ISN'T the first time this has happened. >>> >>> >> >> Exactly. >> >> Now you see the problem ? >> >> > >
