NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad

NNSquad Home Page

NNSquad Mailing List Information

 


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ NNSquad ] Re: Broadband Infrastructure (from IP)


On 12/31 15:24, Barry Gold wrote:
> consent of the scanned site, attempts to exploit known security holes).   
> [Note: I would have no objection if users have to opt-in before remove  
> access to servers is allowed, as long as there is no additional charge  
> for this.  That protects the vast majority of users from having their  
> systems exploited in various ways, at a small inconvenience (one phone  
> call) to the relative few who actually _do_ want to run  
> web/ftp/filesharing servers.]

This is a particularly important point.  I have no general objections
to the concept that ISPs block by default certain ports with high
abuse potential (e.g. port 25), *so long* as non-abusing customers can
have those blocks removed upon request and without charge.

Unfortunately, many ISPs have used port blocks and server prohibitions
as leverage to push customers to more expensive service tiers ("You
wanna run a server?  You want port 25 or 80?  We don't care if it's
low traffic, you still gotta get Business Class static IP service!"

Simplistic anti-spam procedures recommended by some anti-spam groups
have pushed the idea of universal port 25 blocking for dynamic
addresses, and have also resulted in many sites routinely blocking
what they incorrectly *believe* to be dynamic IP addresses from their
mail input portals.  Overly broad blocks are also common, due to
administrators who simply block (for example) entire Class C networks
when they detect spam from any included address, not realizing (or
perhaps not caring) that a mix of dynamic and static addresses under a
variety of different ownerships are present in that range.  I've fought
battles to get some of my own static addresses unblocked over the
years due to exactly this kind of "broad blocking" situation.

Non-abusing customers being lumped in with abusers for the same
restrictions, and non-neutral ISP actions being blatantly used to
unfairly force customers to unnecessarily expensive tiers, are just
two obvious examples of why this entire area has become so
contentious.

--Lauren--
NNSquad Moderator