Jeremy Austin
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 8:55 AM
To: John Levine
Cc: niels=na...@bakker.net; NANOG list
Subject: Re: GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 3:55 AM, John Levine wrote:
>
> Please don't guess (like, you know, MaxMind does.) USPS
On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 16:43:00 -0700, Todd Crane said:
> You do realize that this is the exact kind of thing that caused this
> discussion in the first place. I'm well familiar with that case. I was talking
> about my own experiences in the food service industry, but of course you
> barely
> read a
On 4/13/16 6:25 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
You *do* realize that the woman in the McDonald's case got *third degree*
burns and required skin grafts, right? Water at 180F is hot enough to
burn you - we even have a word for it: scalding. And unlike sipping too-hot
coffee, where you can s
You do realize that this is the exact kind of thing that caused this discussion
in the first place. I'm well familiar with that case. I was talking about my
own experiences in the food service industry, but of course you barely read a
sentence and set on a war path accusing me of not checking my
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 08:08:29AM +0300, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> On 12/04/2016 00:41, Ricky Beam wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:55:11 -0400, Chris Boyd
> > wrote:
> >> Interesting article.
> >>
> >> http://fusion.net/story/287592/internet-mapping-glitch-kansas-farm/
> > ...
> >
> > "Until you
Or (90S,0), so they get a bit of fresh air and have some time think
during the voyage :-)
On 4/11/16 2:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> Or 0,0, send the FBI to Africa on a boating trip. that would probably be
> easier than "unknown" or "null".
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 10:02 AM, Ken Chase wrote:
>
> Cant believe law enforcement is using this kind of info to execute searches.
> Wouldnt that undermine the credibility of any evidence brought up in trials
> for any geoip locates?
What overworked and underpaid public defender is going to know
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 03:31:47PM -, John Levine wrote:
> >There are similar problems with phone numbers. Google's libphonenumber,
> >for example, will tell you that +1 855 266 7269 is in the US. It's not,
> >it's Canadian ...
> Actually, it's probably both US and Canadian. When you call an 8
On 2016-04-13 09:11, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 20:17:03 -0400, Jean-Francois Mezei said:
>> All GeoIP services would be forced to
>
> How?
Fair point. However, considering more and more outfits block content
based on IP geolocation, once has to wonder if an outfit such
>There are similar problems with phone numbers. Google's libphonenumber,
>for example, will tell you that +1 855 266 7269 is in the US. It's not,
>it's Canadian. It appears that for any NANP "area code" that isn't
>assigned to a particular place libphonenumber just says "it's in the US"
>instead of
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:57:42 -0700, Todd Crane said:
>.What ever happened to holding people responsible for being
> stupid. When did it start becoming ((fill in the blank)) coffee shop
> for you burning your tongue on your coffee
Whatever happened to holding people responsible for fact checking be
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 20:17:03 -0400, Jean-Francois Mezei said:
> All GeoIP services would be forced to
How?
pgpE7Fsimh3CW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On 2016-04-13 05:57, Todd Crane wrote:
As to a solution, why don’t we just register the locations (more or less) with
ARIN? Hell, with the amount of money we all pay them in annual fees, I can’t
imagine it would be too hard for them to maintain. They could offer it as part
of their public who
On Wed, 13 Apr 2016, Nathan Anderson wrote:
> What I do get upset hearing about, though, is law enforcement
> agencies using that kind of data in order to execute a warrant. There
> is nothing actionable there, and yet from the sounds of it, some LEAs
> are getting search warrants or conductin
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 07:14:15PM -0500, Theodore Baschak wrote:
> > On Apr 12, 2016, at 7:10 PM, Jean-Francois Mezei wrote:
> > On 2016-04-11 13:22, Ken Chase wrote:
> >> Well they DO know the IP location is within the USA -
> > A friend in Australia was with an ISP onwed by a US firm and his IP
Really? - You want RIRs to now perpetuate an application of IPs they are
not designed for?
The activities of MaxMind and similar need to be exposed so people
understand the problem. No matter how Geo IP businesses might back
peddle and say they never intended their services to be considered as
aut
re that traffic
originated.
-- Nathan
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Todd Crane
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:58 PM
To: Jean-Francois Mezei
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences
I like (sarcasm
I like (sarcasm) how everybody here either wants to point fingers at MaxMind or
offer up coordinates to random places knowing that it will never happen. What
ever happened to holding people responsible for being stupid. When did it start
becoming ((fill in the blank)) coffee shop’s for you burni
All GeoIP services would be forced to document their default lat/long
values so that users know that when these values, they know it is a
generic one for that country. (or supply +181. +91.0 which is an
invalid value indicating that there is no lat/long, look at country code
given).
> On Apr 12, 2016, at 7:10 PM, Jean-Francois Mezei wrote:
>
> On 2016-04-11 13:22, Ken Chase wrote:
>> Well they DO know the IP location is within the USA -
>
>
> A friend in Australia was with an ISP onwed by a US firm and his IP
> address often geolocated to the USA.
>
Similarly, IPv6 spac
Re: Sending police to middle of a lake..
Puts new meaning to a fishing expedition for police :-)
On 2016-04-11 13:34, Steve Mikulasik wrote:
> Mather says they’re going to change them. They are picking new default
> locations for the U.S. and Ashburn, Virginia that are in the middle of bodies
> of water,
Why not the White House or Wahington Monument ?
Or better yet, some large office comp
On 2016-04-11 13:22, Ken Chase wrote:
> Well they DO know the IP location is within the USA -
A friend in Australia was with an ISP onwed by a US firm and his IP
address often geolocated to the USA.
On 4/12/2016 08:31, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 03:10:44PM -0400, Sean Donelan
wrote:
If GeoIP insists on giving a specific lon/lat, instead of an uncertaintity
how about using locations such as the followign as the "default I don't
know where it is"
United
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 3:55 AM, John Levine wrote:
>
> Please don't guess (like, you know, MaxMind does.) USPS has its own
> database of all of the deliverable addresses in the country. They
> have their problems, but give or take data staleness as buildings
> are built or demolished, that's n
In a message written on Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 03:10:44PM -0400, Sean Donelan
wrote:
> If GeoIP insists on giving a specific lon/lat, instead of an uncertaintity
> how about using locations such as the followign as the "default I don't
> know where it is"
>
> United States: 38.8899 N, 77.0091 W (
In article <20160411191347.gc4...@excession.tpb.net> you write:
>* baldur.nordd...@gmail.com (Baldur Norddahl) [Mon 11 Apr 2016, 21:02 CEST]:
>>They should stop giving out coordinates on houses period. Move the
>>coordinate to the nearest street intersection if you need to be that
>>precise (I woul
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 06:15:08PM -, John Levine wrote:
>
> >The problem with MaxMind (and other geoip databases I've seen that do
> >Lat/Long as well as Country / State / Town) is that the
> >data doesn't include uncertainty, so it returns "38.0/-97.0" rather than
> >"somewhere in a 3000 m
On 12/04/2016 00:41, Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:55:11 -0400, Chris Boyd
> wrote:
>> Interesting article.
>>
>> http://fusion.net/story/287592/internet-mapping-glitch-kansas-farm/
> ...
>
> "Until you reached out to us, we were unaware that there were issues..."
>
> Bull! I can dig
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> So really, what is needed is two additional fields for the lat/lon of
> laterr/lonerr so that, for example, instead of just 38.0/-97.0, you would
> get 38.0±2/-97.0±10 or something like that.
>
It does seem needed to the geo location compani
Owne,
* Owen DeLong (o...@delong.com) wrote:
> However, my home address has been published in multiple whois databases since
> I moved here in 1993.
>
> Not once has a nitwit with a gun shown up on my doorstep as a result. (I have
> had visits from nitwits with guns,
> but they were the results
On 4/11/2016 11:55, Chris Boyd wrote:
Interesting article.
http://fusion.net/story/287592/internet-mapping-glitch-kansas-farm/
An hour’s drive from Wichita, Kansas, in a little town called Potwin,
there is a 360-acre piece of land with a very big problem.
The plot has been owned by the Vogelm
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 15:23 , Niels Bakker wrote:
>
>>> Oh, heck, you know better than that. You can put in all the flags and
>>> warnings you want, but if it returns an address, nitwits will show up at
>>> the address with guns.
>
> * o...@delong.com (Owen DeLong) [Tue 12 Apr 2016, 00:02 CE
Oh, heck, you know better than that. You can put in all the flags
and warnings you want, but if it returns an address, nitwits will
show up at the address with guns.
* o...@delong.com (Owen DeLong) [Tue 12 Apr 2016, 00:02 CEST]:
I hear this argument about various things over and over and over
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 12:01 , Baldur Norddahl wrote:
>
> On 11 April 2016 at 20:15, John Levine wrote:
>
>> Oh, heck, you know better than that. You can put in all the flags and
>> warnings you want, but if it returns an address, nitwits will show up
>> at the address with guns.
>>
>> Bodies
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 11:15 , John Levine wrote:
>
>
>> The problem with MaxMind (and other geoip databases I've seen that do
>> Lat/Long as well as Country / State / Town) is that the
>> data doesn't include uncertainty, so it returns "38.0/-97.0" rather than
>> "somewhere in a 3000 mile rad
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:55:11 -0400, Chris Boyd
wrote:
Interesting article.
http://fusion.net/story/287592/internet-mapping-glitch-kansas-farm/
...
"Until you reached out to us, we were unaware that there were issues..."
Bull! I can dig up dozens (if not hundreds) of emails from coworkers an
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 10:26 , Steve Atkins wrote:
>
>>
>> On Apr 11, 2016, at 10:11 AM, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon 2016-Apr-11 13:02:14 -0400, Ken Chase wrote:
>>
>>> TL;DR: GeoIP put unknown IP location mappings to the 'center of the country'
>>> but then rounded off the lat lon
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 21:13:48 +0200, Niels Bakker said:
> * baldur.nordd...@gmail.com (Baldur Norddahl) [Mon 11 Apr 2016, 21:02 CEST]:
> >They should stop giving out coordinates on houses period. Move the
> >coordinate to the nearest street intersection if you need to be that
> >precise (I would pre
* baldur.nordd...@gmail.com (Baldur Norddahl) [Mon 11 Apr 2016, 21:02 CEST]:
They should stop giving out coordinates on houses period. Move the
coordinate to the nearest street intersection if you need to be that
precise (I would prefer nearest town square). Anything more than that
should be ille
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016, Laszlo Hanyecz wrote:
I imagine some consumers of the data will 'correct' the position to fall on
the nearest road in front of the nearest house.
If GeoIP insists on giving a specific lon/lat, instead of an uncertaintity
how about using locations such as the followign as t
On 11 April 2016 at 20:15, John Levine wrote:
> Oh, heck, you know better than that. You can put in all the flags and
> warnings you want, but if it returns an address, nitwits will show up
> at the address with guns.
>
> Bodies of water probably are the least bad alternative. I wonder if
> the
On 2016-04-11 18:15, John Levine wrote:
Bodies of water probably are the least bad alternative. I wonder if
they're going to hydrolocate all of the unknown addresses, or only the
ones where they get publically shamed.
R's,
John
I imagine some consumers of the data will 'correct' the positi
Why not use the locations of their own homes? They're indirectly
sending mobs to randomly chosen locations. There's enough middle men
involved so they can all say they're doing nothing wrong, but wrong is
being done.
-Laszlo
On 2016-04-11 17:34, Steve Mikulasik wrote:
Just so everyone is
>The problem with MaxMind (and other geoip databases I've seen that do Lat/Long
>as well as Country / State / Town) is that the
>data doesn't include uncertainty, so it returns "38.0/-97.0" rather than
>"somewhere in a 3000 mile radius circle centered on
>38.0/-97.0".
>
>Someone should show them
In article <90136824.12309.1460396310889.JavaMail.mhammett@ThunderFuck> you
write:
>So they launch exhaustive and expensive searches of lakes instead? :-)
I'm starting a new chain of kiosks that rent wet suits and snorkels.
R's,
John
.org
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 12:34:35 PM
Subject: RE: GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences
Just so everyone is clear, Maxmind is changing their default locations.
" Now that I’ve made MaxMind aware of the consequences of the default locations
it’s chosen, Mather says t
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 1:34 PM, Steve Mikulasik
> wrote:
>
> Just so everyone is clear, Maxmind is changing their default locations.
>
> " Now that I’ve made MaxMind aware of the consequences of the default
> locations it’s chosen, Mather says they’re going to change them. They are
> picking
.org
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 12:34:35 PM
Subject: RE: GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences
Just so everyone is clear, Maxmind is changing their default locations.
" Now that I’ve made MaxMind aware of the consequences of the default locations
it’s chosen, Mather says t
Just so everyone is clear, Maxmind is changing their default locations.
" Now that I’ve made MaxMind aware of the consequences of the default locations
it’s chosen, Mather says they’re going to change them. They are picking new
default locations for the U.S. and Ashburn, Virginia that are in the
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 10:11 AM, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
>
>
> On Mon 2016-Apr-11 13:02:14 -0400, Ken Chase wrote:
>
>> TL;DR: GeoIP put unknown IP location mappings to the 'center of the country'
>> but then rounded off the lat long so it points at this farm.
>>
>> Cant believe law enforcement
Well they DO know the IP location is within the USA - many apps use the GeoIP
API and require a lat/long returned, and some need one that lands within a
country border (thus my suggestion of middle of a remote wilderness park - let
the cops search some desolate remote desert in nevada amirite?)
Ma
Has happened in Atlanta, too, due to (what I think) was a lookup on the
ASN's whois, which wasn't specific:
http://fusion.net/story/214995/find-my-phone-apps-lead-to-wrong-home/
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Chris Boyd wrote:
>
> Interesting article.
>
> http://fusion.net/story/287592/interne
Or 0,0, send the FBI to Africa on a boating trip. that would probably be
easier than "unknown" or "null".
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
>
> On Mon 2016-Apr-11 13:02:14 -0400,
On Mon 2016-Apr-11 13:02:14 -0400, Ken Chase wrote:
TL;DR: GeoIP put unknown IP location mappings to the 'center of the country'
but then rounded off the lat long so it points at this farm.
Cant believe law enforcement is using this kind of info to execute searches.
Wouldnt that undermine the
TL;DR: GeoIP put unknown IP location mappings to the 'center of the country'
but then rounded off the lat long so it points at this farm.
Cant believe law enforcement is using this kind of info to execute searches.
Wouldnt that undermine the credibility of any evidence brought up in trials
for any
56 matches
Mail list logo
