[anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: RBL policy

oh and yes, btw, that first word 'rechtswidrig'. that is also covered. 
it becomes 'rechtswidrig' because

you infringe upon someone's freedom to do business in the fully legal 
way that he or she pleases,

AND force them into pyshical labour; contacting you...


and no, you cannot use the RIPE policies as a lever to force people to 
contact you, as RIPE was

set up by ISPs and Carriers, merely to keep track of which ip ranges we 
use, not the other way around.

we can still just announce them and not inform ripe you know, should 
ripe ever make trouble.

ripe is not in a position to link using it's database to silly demands 
of third parties (blacklists)

updating ripe is a -courtesy- to the other isps. the entire internet is 
held together by -courtesy's- and -common interest- and i'm sorry to 
inform you, but blacklists, are neither part of the 'common interests' 
nor 'courtesy' nor 'contractual relations' schemes holding it all 
together. as blacklists are not as such, part of the internet, but part 
of the many protocols that -reside on top of it-.


what you're asking here (isps to spend manhours to -delist-) is the same 
as facebook asking isps to moderate comments for them.

and you're not just asking, you're blackmailing.

if something should be disconnected its not 'spammers' but blacklists 
that blackmail us.


On 31 ينا, 2017 ص 09:09, HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker wrote:
>
>
>   Strafgesetzbuch (StGB)
>   § 240 Nötigung
>
> (1) Wer einen Menschen rechtswidrig mit Gewalt oder durch Drohung mit 
> einem empfindlichen Übel zu einer Handlung, Duldung oder Unterlassung 
> nötigt, wird mit Freiheitsstrafe bis zu drei Jahren oder mit 
> Geldstrafe bestraft.
> (2) Rechtswidrig ist die Tat, wenn die Anwendung der Gewalt oder die 
> Androhung des Übels zu dem angestrebten Zweck als verwerflich 
> anzusehen ist.
> (3) Der Versuch ist strafbar.
> (4) In besonders schweren Fällen ist die Strafe Freiheitsstrafe von 
> sechs Monaten bis zu fünf Jahren. Ein besonders schwerer Fall liegt in 
> der Regel vor, wenn der Täter
>
> 1.
>     eine Schwangere zum Schwangerschaftsabbruch nötigt oder
> 2.
>     seine Befugnisse oder seine Stellung als Amtsträger mißbraucht.
>
>
> being forced to spend manhours (= money) to 'delist' from 3rd party 
> dns blacklists is 'empflindliche uebel', and yes you are forcing them 
> into a 'handlung (delisting/acting AGAINST their paying customer), 
> duldung (ignoring the fact that you call them and others affected by 
> your block 'spammers') or 'unterlassung' (interfering with their 
> provider immunity and  right to sell services to anyone, anywhere, and 
> keep doing so - as long as those don't break the law -there- and even 
> if they do you can still sell them services as that's their problem 
> -there- not yours. per-se. ;)
>
> now. that's just the blackmail part and just the BRD part... other eu 
> memberstates usually have simular laws...
>
> if you knowingly and willingly insert ips into a blackmail 
> infrastructure which you have advertised with the argument that you 
> KNOW a listing has impact on 1/3rd of the worlds mail delivery, or 
> worse, such as spamhaus DROP, where you KNOW a listing causes part of 
> the internet to completely drop that traffic, as you advertise it just 
> for -that- purpose and know how many nodes use it, that completely 
> falls under pretty much any computer sabotage act out there -ever-.
>
> but... ofcourse... to you... some not-even-illegal use of 'smtp' or 
> some wintendo virusses that could be out there, are of higher priority 
> than keeping the internet working, and not breaking any laws yourself.
>
> keep in mind, we, the owners of the internet, isps and carriers, and 
> yes we do OWN it, 'tolerate' blacklists... as long as they don't go 
> around making silly demands, such as 'contacting' them, or gaining too 
> much influence and starting to 'demand' to disconnect things without 
> even bothering to get a court order.
>
> what's next... the RIAA setting up one as well?
>
> On 31 ينا, 2017 ص 04:17, ox wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 13:21:54 +0000
>> HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker<svenk at xs4all.nl>  wrote:
>>> smtp is just one of many protocols out there, a primitive, fairly
>>> unimportant and severely lacking in terms of security one at that,
>>> and it's protection cannot be a reason for any disconnection -ever-.
>>>
>> This thread is about DNSBL and not about the smtp protocol but the
>> replies helped us all understand why it is important to permanently list
>> entire IP ranges. (Even if the resources change hands)
>>
>> Personally, I think that block times should be increased or become more
>> permanent.
>>
>> Practically and right now, some of the block lists that I feed data
>> into is talking about discontinuing 24 hour blocks completely and
>> moving to much longer block times.
>>
>> Other lists are considering completely discontinuing auto de-listing.
>>   
>> The effect of this will mean that abuse@ will have to become more responsive
>> in order to avoid being more permanently listed.
>>
>> Andre
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20170131/ee88f82c/attachment.html>