Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

RE: Ettiquette and rules regarding Hijacked ASN's or IP space?
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <chris () UU NET>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:49:51 +0000 (GMT)



On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Michel Py wrote:

Chris,

Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
So, for an example, if I steal ASN 8143 (already stolen so its
mute) and I'm 'a good guy', all I want to do is run a network
no spam/abuse eminates from it,

Question: if you are a 'good guy', why didn't you request your own legit
ASN in the first place? It's less work than finding one to hijack and
hijack it. And probably cheaper too: $500 does not pay for much of my or
your time.

excellent point :) the distinction between 'good' and 'bad' was just
non-abuser/abuser. Certianly ARIN's requirements for ASN ownership are
simple enough, be multihomed and have a 'unique' routing policy. If you
need an ASN likely you are already multihomed and have a 'unique' routing
policy, eh?



I am not advocating one or the other, and to me the rules should
apply to both groups (all theives treated equally)... I'm just
curious as to the general thought on this subject.

Without taking sides, does the first group really exist?


If you fuzz over the 'bad'/'good' beyond 'abuser'/'non-abuser' then
perhaps there isn't a distinction. Perhaps clarification: Someone that
sets up an ISP and hijacks ASN/ip-blocks specifically to abuse versus
someone who hijacked an ASN to avoid paperwork.

The distinction isn't necessarily for any real purpose, except as a
talking point. I've seen both groups get discussed, and only the 'abusing'
group seems to get hounded... or atleast thats what I've seen.


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]