[AusNOG] Internet companies forced to block The Pirate Bay, bittorrent websites in Australia, Federal Court rules

[Damian Guppy]

I'm not sure why you would make that IP publicly available (routeable)
outside your own network if it is just what your Customer facing DNS
servers are pointing blocked records to. And then in that case, exactly how
much DDOS bandwidth do you think internet attackers can drum up on the
Telstra network? Even if it was a sizeable amount, Telstra can take their
own action to stop those end points from participating in the attack
directly.

--Damian

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Bradley Amm <brad at bradleyamm.com> wrote:

> That will be a DDOS target soon
>
>
>
> *From:* AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Mark
> Sergeant
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 20 December 2016 11:52 AM
> *To:* Michael Keating; Mark Andrews; Narelle
> *Cc:* ausnog at ausnog.net
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Internet companies forced to block The Pirate
> Bay, bittorrent websites in Australia, Federal Court rules
>
>
>
> DNS based, with an A record of:
>
>
>
> 101.167.166.53
>
>
>
> which serves that page for any request that may hit it.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> *From: *AusNOG <ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net> on behalf of Michael
> Keating <mkeating44 at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 14:47
> *To: *Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org>, Narelle <narellec at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *"ausnog at ausnog.net" <ausnog at ausnog.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [AusNOG] Internet companies forced to block The Pirate
> Bay, bittorrent websites in Australia, Federal Court rules
>
>
>
> For what it's worth, Telstra have a block on The Pirate Bay already.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Michael Keating
>
>
>
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 at 1:27 pm, Narelle <narellec at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> duh s/reasonable/unreasonable
>
>
>
> You can bet your bottom dollar that the ISPs in question will be arguing
> that anything beyond certain basic steps with basic equipment would be
> UNreasonable. The cost to comply is set at $50 per domain name so that must
> give you an indication of what the court thought this was worth.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Narelle <narellec at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> You would just be cutting off your nose to spite your face.
>
>
>
>
>
> The real questions are what happens when DNS blocks are shown to
>
>
> be ineffective.  Is the court going to have to modify the orders.
>
>
>
>
> Then the applicant will have to go back to the court and make the claim
> that the respondents were not complying with the order to "take
> reasonable steps to disable access".
>
>
>
> You can bet your bottom dollar that the ISPs in question will be arguing
> that anything beyond certain basic steps with basic equipment would be
> UNreasonable. The cost to comply is set at $50 per domain name so that must
> give you an indication of what the court thought this was worth.
>
>
>
> If it requires doing incredibly difficult stuff on every single piece of
> network with specialised equipment and highly expert engineering staff,
> then it might no longer be reasonable. Where the line beneath that falls, I
> couldn't tell.
>
>
>
> Either way I think I see a mole in that hole over there...
>
>
>
> And none of this includes the analysis of the almost but not quite rolling
> injunctions. What makes one "web site" the same as another torrenting file
> store?
>
>
>
> *disclaimer* IANAL and I own all the seasons of GoT I've ever watched.
>
>
>
> happy silly season
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Narelle
> narellec at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Narelle
> narellec at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> AusNOG mailing list
>
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20161225/8e32886b/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 95313 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20161225/8e32886b/attachment-0001.jpg>