[anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers

In a couple of occasions (many years ago), some of the IPs under my responsibility, were listed at spamhaus. I contacted them and got delisted, no problem. Of course, after that I took measures so my IP addresses are never involved even by accident, in any "bad" activity: it is my duty.

My conclusion is that it offers a good service, which I can use or not, it is my decision.

I think services such as spamhaus are good, and I don't know if legally they need to be "registered". I could, as a natural person, so no need for registration if is not a business (no incomes), make this kind of service, for free, and for privacy reasons, and understanding that I may be damaging high-level criminal activities, seek my personal and family protection by not disclosing my real data.

I don't think there is nothing wrong about that, because I'm not "forcing" anyone to trust my service or use it, or anything similar. It is up to each individual or organization to use them or not.

If ISP a, b, and c, are abusing my network in any way, and I decide to create a public web page to list them, if I can keep the demonstration of that, there is no court that can tell me "you're doing something illegal". I'm just telling the world "those guys have abused my network, you can use it to filter them to avoid having the same trouble", and I can do that I an anonymous way.

That said, I think it is a bad excuse to say that there is no login to protect freedom of speech. You can do login but not provide that data to "bad" governments. Only if your own country LEA ask for it, because there was a criminal activity on that connection you will need to provide the data. This is the same for *any* other service. I can't agree that VPN's are a different thing.

Note that I'm not trying to say if this or that service is good or bad, but to say that rules are made for all.

Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 8/7/20 14:47, "anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net en nombre de info at fos-vpn.org" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net en nombre de info at fos-vpn.org> escribió:

    Please allow me to comment on this on behalf of the VPN services 
    affected by the accusations: 
    https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum/anti-abuse-wg/PDRhZGNmYmVmLTNmMmYtNjQ2ZC1iOTMzLWNhY2RkMDEyOGU0M0BzdG9yZXkub3ZoPg==

    When you run a VPN service it simply lies in the nature of things that 
    some miscreants buy accounts which lead to various types of complaints.

    Our principle is not to serve the bad, but the good!

    We checked all SBL listings in the past and found out that most of them 
    were simply invalid.
    Our removal requests were all ignored by Spamhaus, refusing any 
    communication with us.
    The problem with Spamhaus is that they can do whatever they want and 
    nearly everyone follows them.
    After starting legal actions in the UK against them based on their wrong 
    accusations they moved their headquarters to Andorra, using the address 
    of a hospital located there.
    Earlier on a person we know very well tried the same in Switzerland and 
    found out that they are not even registered there; they just rented some 
    offices from Regus in Geneva.
    Unlike other services such as BitNinja or Blocklist, Spamhaus has no 
    real imprint on its website.
    All those names such as Thomas Morrison, Pete Dawes or Vincent Hanna are 
    fake identities.
    Except a few insiders nobody knows who's behind that company, which 
    claims to be nonprofit.

    It is true that VPN services which don't log any user activities attract 
    people with bad intentions and believe me: We are not happy about that 
    either...but we have to live with that.
    To us it seemed that it became a real passion of Mr. Steve Linford to 
    destroy non-logging VPN providers; providers which are needed in 
    countries like Iran or China to protect the freedom of speech (we have a 
    lot of customers there).
    More than 90 per cent of all VPN providers don't allow any Port 
    Forwarding, but closing all Ports would be a kind of censorship in our 
    opinion.
    We do have our ToS which don't allow any misuse of our service, but we 
    have no control over the actions of our users whatsoever.

    I know that most of you won't be satisfied with that answer, but this is 
    how we see things from our perspective.




**********************************************
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.