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

In my country, and I'm sure in many others, if the police (either individual members or as an authority) or anyone, even if he is a judge, from the government, is doing illegal actions, spying, including taking control of persons or organization computers/networks, etc., will be judged and jailed.

Because is Internet is not different than spying people with hiding mics or cameras in their homes, or opening their letters, etc.

Of course, unless there is a court order. However, I really can't believe that in most of our countries a judge will allow a court order for a massive hijack affecting many people and organizations, unless there is an emergency risk for the population, and this is done in those cases by declaring a "national emergency situation".

Regards,
Jordi
 
 

El 23/3/19 6:17, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Ronald F. Guilmette" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net en nombre de rfg at tristatelogic.com> escribió:

    
    In message <20190322230602.GJ99066 at cilantro.c4inet.net>, 
    "Sascha Luck [ml]" <aawg at c4inet.net> wrote:
    
    >On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 02:43:14PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
    >>Yet Erik Bais is arguing that RIPE policy decisions should be driven by
    >>a desire to accomodate the needs of exactly such Bad Actors.  That is
    >...
    >... Erik is in no way arguing Hacking Team's case...
    
    You could have fooled me!  If he didn't want to use that case to try
    to make a point -against- the proposal, then why did he even bring
    up this old case in that kind of a context?
    
    In any case, as the -full- posting that you snipped from made clear,
    it doesn't really make any difference, one way or the other, to the
    point that -I- tried to make.
    
    I will try this again...
    
    EVEN IF we accept, even just for the sake of argument, the highly
    dubious and totally unsubstantiated allegation that the proprietors
    of the Italian ISP Aruba were forced, threatened, cajoled, browbeat,
    bribed, or tortured into doing the bidding of the Italian Police,
    and specifically to perform a BGP hijack, then what lesson or message
    should we all take from that?
    
    The qustion is this:  Does the RIPE community want to continue to
    effectively endorse... as it is now doing, by default, by failing to
    condemn... the "rights" of the Italian Police, the British Police, the
    German Police, the French Police, the Polish Police, the Serbian Police,
    the Macedonian Ministry of Public Affairs, and maybe even the entire
    Estonian Royal Navy Marching Band to perform BGP hijacks whenever it
    suits the perceived purposes of each and every one of these organizations
    or any of their constituent parts or departments?
    
    If so, then I'd just like to point out that this is a VERY slippery
    slope, and one that is quite likely to come back to haunt this
    organization in the years ahead.  Is there a government anywhere
    in all of europe that would NOT like to exercise more control over
    what its own people and/or those of other nations hear, see, read, 
    or think about?  Did the people of Spain have any say whatsoever in
    the election of the Italian Police?  Given that they did not, does
    this community really want to continue endorsing the notion that
    various parts and pieces of individual national, regional, or local
    governments have some sort of a soverign "right" to engineer BGP
    hijacks, as the Italian Police are alleged to have done, at their
    own unilateral whim?  Or should this body instead take arms against
    this brewing sea of troubles and by opposing end them?
    
    It cannot be both ways.  Either RIPE turns a deliberately blind eye
    to hijacks or else it formally denounces them as being against policy.
    
    I, for one, would be -glad- if indeed it was or could be proven that
    the Italian Police were responsible for the hijacking incident in
    question, because that fact, once proven, would hopefully make
    everyone here wake up and smell the coffee.
    
    It is fine for all of us here to sit around in our comfortable arm-
    chairs and debate the finer points of the philosophical pros and cons
    of the separation of church and state, or the separation of RIPE from
    "enforcement", but while we are all sitting around having our high-
    minded philosophical debates, out there in the real world, things
    are happening, and not always good things.  If an Italian Police
    Lieutenant can order the hijacking of a block of IP addreses today,
    and if there are -zero- repercussions from that, then what is there
    to prevent a Belarusian Minister of Information from doing the same
    thing tomorrow, but with significantly more sinister intent?
    
    Is this REALLY the future that the RIPE community wants?  A future
    where every junior-league despot sitting in some cramped and dimly-lit
    ministerial office in any country in europe can order a hijack, and
    then no matter what the reasons or context, everyone will just shrug
    and say "Oh, well, that's OK then", because it was done "under color
    of law" in that specific country?
    
    I am honestly flummoxed that I even need to point out how insane this
    is.  And yet this is the exact indefensible status quo favored by
    the conservatives who insist that RIPE must remain NOT the master in
    its own house.
    
    
    Regards,
    rfg
    
    
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.