[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

Let's use a less loaded analogy than a gun store :-)

Suppose we are dealing with a logistics company that uses stolen lorries/trucks.
May their use of stolen vehicles potentially affect their carrier license?

Note that, even if after many months of processes the agreement with the rir was terminated and the AS taken back, still that does not preclude the company from having ip addresses or having access to the internet.

I expect the next draft not to rely on a single expert, but a panel of 3 experts (plus then the appealing phase). Would that solve your concerns?



> Blocking content distribution methods is
> effectively blocking the content itself. If your
> newspaper was unable to print and distribute
> their news because their electricity had been
> shut off (for anything outside of nonpayment),
> it would still be considered censorship.

No. The newspaper may pay its electricity punctually, yet be required to have its electrical power shut off. A good example of that would be non-compliance with the local electricity regulation, which may range from an install so bad that could cause a fire to simply having an old meter which doesn't support real-time reading

Should the action against the above-mentioned logistics company differ if it was used for delivery by a newspaper?


You raise a good point that the allowance of reports by the general public could lead to attacks against 'unpopular' entities (such as a certain political party) by means of fake reports. However, given that it has to be based on technical facts, I'm not sure if that's already enough or there should be some additional speedy path in the proposal for them to be discarded (and where to put the line?).


Ángel


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20190401/ad82cd68/attachment.html>