On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 3:57 AM, William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simp...@gmail.com> wrote: [snip] > Certainly, hijacking google.com NS records to JOMAX.NET would be a > criminal interference. After all, that's all DNSsec signed now, > isn't it?
I would rather see DNSSEC and TLS/HTTPS get implemented end to end. The last thing we need is a court to step in and say "It's not legal for an ISP to blacklist, block, or redirect traffic, to any hostname or IP address." Most likely the ISPs' lawyers were smart enough to include a clause in the ToS/AUP allowing the ISP to intercept, blackhole, or redirect access to any hostname or IP address. The name for an ISP intercepting traffic from its own users is not "interference" or "DoS", because they're breaking the operation of (er) only their own network. The solution is to spread their name as widely as possible, so consumers can make an informed choice if they wish to avoid service providers that engage in abusive practices, and bring it attention to regulators if the service providers are acting as an abusive monopoly in regards to their interception practices. -- -JH
