<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7638.1">
<TITLE>RE: [AusNOG] Possible DDoS attack against .augovernmentalsites-~65minutes from now.</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>As they do me.<BR>
<BR>
I am hoping and praying for a change of government or at least direction in the upcoming year. If not for our civil rights, for my back pocket - the cost of filtering equipment will hurt us greatly, especially with our economy the way it's been.<BR>
<BR>
I think the cost of internet filtering is not something to be ignored: for a company of our size this is not just an expense on our balance sheet, it's something that directly affects our bottom line. $50,000 (or more?) worth of hardware, supporting infastructure and integration could be the difference to whether I can afford to put my daughter through private school or not - and we lucky that we are at a stage where we would be able to absorb such a cost. An upfront cost of this magitude certainly would have broken us a year ago and will raise the barrier to entry in this industry beyond what many smaller players could afford.<BR>
<BR>
Some may argue that this is a good thing, but competition breeds excellence - many larger service providers in Australia (Internode, iiNet, PIPE - and probably many others) started out as nothing more than vision, an excercize in pragmatic management and a small capital injection - will this increased barrier to entry stifle innovation in industry that thrives on just that?<BR>
<BR>
I doubt I am the only person in this scenario. We're just a husband and wife team with a few talented helpers/employees/contractors - another "working family" hit by the collateral of misguidance.<BR>
<BR>
Regards,<BR>
Curtis<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net on behalf of roland@chan.id.au<BR>
Sent: Thu 10/09/2009 05:21<BR>
To: Mark Caetano; ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net; Shaun Dwyer<BR>
Cc: ausnog@ausnog.net<BR>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Possible DDoS attack against .augovernmentalsites-~65minutes from now.<BR>
<BR>
I find this incident a bit sad, and probably counter-productive for the attacker. I don't recall the last time anyone used force to protest about a purely domestic political issue. I didn't think it was a feature of Australian politics.<BR>
<BR>
To my mind a DDoS is a step beyond mere defacement, albeit "virtual". That it has come to this is probably an indication of how little the electorate cares about this issue, at least as long as they can still torrent/youtube/watch a guy swinging a baby around (an MA+ video it seems, so exempt from the filtering regime. Phew!).<BR>
<BR>
I wonder that the recent proposed changes to the Telco Interception Act have not generated nearly so much heat. They are significantly more interesting for a technology minded civil libertarian. They scare the pants off me.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Sent via BlackBerry® from Telstra<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Mark Caetano <mark@akami.info><BR>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 00:24:03<BR>
To: Shaun Dwyer<shaun@dwyer.id.au><BR>
Cc: <ausnog@ausnog.net><BR>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Possible DDoS attack against .au governmental<BR>
sites-~65minutes from now.<BR>
<BR>
_______________________________________________<BR>
AusNOG mailing list<BR>
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net<BR>
<A HREF="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</A><BR>
<BR>
_______________________________________________<BR>
AusNOG mailing list<BR>
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net<BR>
<A HREF="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>