🚀 go-pugleaf

[POSTED TO ba.internet; PLEASE REPLY THERE]

ORBS more or less admits that the practice of relay testing is
objectionable -- it just attempts to dismiss objections with the claimed
justification that the practice is the 'lesser of two evils' (by its own
standards of course).  Kind of like trying to justify shoplifting when
it's done for a good cause.  ;-)


In <MPG.14cb17861394b8e8989f4a@207.126.101.100>,
See_email_@ddress_below.This_one_is.invalid (Philip J. Koenig) wrote:

>In article <B6740234.2F556%no-spam@RadioMonopoly.com>, no-spam@RadioMonopoly.com 
>(John Higdon) writes...

>There are a significant group of people in the sysadmin and/or
>computer security field that consider simple network scanning
>to be a malicious act - indeed there has been (to my knowledge)
>some degree of effort to criminalize such activities - ie 
>port scanning.
>
>It is also well-established net.etiquette that probing systems
>external to you without any intention of actually engaging in
>the transfer of information is at the least a somewhat rude
>act - particularly when you are doing it without the permission
>of the target network.
>
>So I don't think anyone in their right mind would ever try to
>claim that something like ORBS probes are "denial of service",
>but there are quite a few people that consider it at the very
>least "rude" and perhaps even "malicious".
>
>I will add that since ORBS by their own admission simply scans
>for servers which "may potentially be used for spam" rather
>than servers which have any proven association with it -- the
>repeated scanning of servers which have proven - over and over
>again - to be NOT vulnerable.. is easily taken as an unecessary
>and even abusive practice.

-- 
Best regards,
John Navas     <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
     CABLE MODEM/DSL GUIDE:  <http://Cable-DSL.home.att.net/>