- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Speeking of "Moral Police":Verizon Denies DSL Because of Subscriber's Name
by Jeffrey A. Williams Aug. 3, 2008

Aug. 3, 2008

All, Who's the "Moral Police now"? Seems that Verizon has taken it upon themselves to be so. And it took the "Enquirer"! to get them off the dime?! Well let's hope this fine Dr. doesn't try to register his last name as a DN, like maybe Libshitz.edu? Or maybe Libshitz.info? >:) Note: one has to have a sense of humor to appriciate these things of course... See: When retired Philadelphia-area doctor and Vietnam veteran Dr. Herman I. Libshitz went to upgrade his dial-up connection to Verizon DSL, he was informed they http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/26089374.html wouldn't complete the order because his last name contained an expletive. Repeated calls to several levels of management at Verizon failed to resolve the problem, with several managers suggesting he change his last name. It all worked out in the end, after the Philadelphia Enquirer intervened. Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Navajo Nation Losing Internet Access
by Jeffrey A. Williams Aug. 3, 2008

Aug. 3, 2008

All, I wonder if ICANN, google, or Verisign will step up here and help these poor native americans out? If they did, it would sure be good PR! Maybe even the ALAC and GA members could pass the hat as well? >:) It's nearly a sure thing Uncle Sam isn't going to stand up. See: Due to contracts that are allegedly FUBAR, and associated wrangling, the Navajo Nation is http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR200808010… being cut off by its satellite ISP. This is the final stage of the process, which already deprived chapter houses of access last April. While the business mechanisms play themselves into the expected ludicrous snarl, the real question may be: Is there a place for an inexpensive ham/technogeek/FOSS solution that could bypass the antics of the for-pay providers? Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Issues anyone? to: Band Leaks Own Album, Blames Pirates
by Jeffrey A. Williams Aug. 2, 2008

Aug. 2, 2008

All, Now isn't this just interesting?! I wonder if Buckcherry is an RIAA member? If so, I would than have to wonder how well the RIAA and subsequently the IPC audits it membership policies and practices, if in the case of the RIAA, they do at all beyond, what the last membership check was, and how much that member donated in addition for this year? Maybe Nick can use this a leverage when he is "Visiting" ICANN in MDR for travel expenses? >:) Oh and Nick, you might want to also hit up Google as well for those travel expenses as there is clearly a FCC Title 5 violation in their part in this, and remember anyone can file complaint with the FCC as a John Doe. Yet we have an RIAA that is constantly claiming that there are pirates under every rock and behind every Domain name, with BitTorrent being the "Blackbeard" of the bunch, and every other university student a would be major league "Pirate in Training" demanding P2P be regulated and constantly monitored by LEA's, while Google plays on both sides of the fence. Extrodinary! ACTA anyone? >:) See article: When the hard rock band Buckcherry found out their latest single had leaked on BitTorrent, they didn't try to cover it up or take the file down. No, instead, they issued a press release. After a bit of research, TorrentFreak found out http://torrentfreak.com/band-leaks-track-to-bittorrent-blames-pirates-08073… \the track wasn't leaked by pirates, but by Josh Klemme, the manager of the band. In an attempt to cover their tracks, the press release was pulled, but it's http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS133080+22-Jul-2008+MW200807… still available through Reuters and Google's cache. Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] ALAC Mailing List Changes - an update
by Jeffrey A. Williams Aug. 2, 2008

Aug. 2, 2008

JFC and all, As history has repeatedly shown, rough consensus isn't realistic. Only a vote of all interested parties as articulated in the MOU will suffice. In your own countries history, the "Let them eat cake" uttering proves should be sufficient evidence to remind you JFC of such an unrealistic notion. So in conclusion, ICANN still does not have an actual "At-large" that fully and unfetteredly represents users/stakeholeders. JFC Morfin wrote: > Vittorio, > this is why I opened a moderated Internet @large list at > http://atlax.org. I do not want to advertise it too much because > france@large plans to carry a technical review on the best way to > support the Internet Governance various Fora and @large groups, and > even possibily enginerr or develop a management tool based upon our > height years of experience of the issue and ICANN. > > That list will be what @larges want it to be as per their rough consensus. > jfc > > At 14:41 02/08/2008, Vittorio Bertola wrote: > > >Ok - the first attempt to send this message (just replying to a message > >from the global public list) got me back a "you're not authorized to > >open your mouth" message. > >Let's see if this other address works. > > > >At-Large Staff ha scritto: > > > Dear ALAC List members: > > > > > > Earlier today, I emailed you about some of the changes to the worldwide > > > At-Large lists, however, I misunderstood a part of what was intended with > > > respect to the new working committee list. > > > > > > It is actually intended that this list will be viewable via the open > > > archives (and, since the mailing lists are all connected to forums on > > > atlarge.icann.org, you can see the list traffic there too), but > > not that you > > > would be able to subscribe to it, as per the ALAC resolution at its July > > > meeting, and in line with other similar lists such as the GNSO Council. > > > >This effectively means that the rest of the community can't participate > >in a discussion with ALAC members. If I had to comment on something that > >an ALAC member said, what I would have to do is: > >- spend my time pressing F5 in my browser on the Web archive of the > >"public" ALAC list so that I can notice that a new message has been sent; > >- read it through the impractical, year-1995-style mail-to-list > >interface that ICANN provides; > >- select and copy the text; > >- open a new message in my email program, directed to the global At > >Large list; > >- paste the text as quote (hoping that my email app lets me do so); > >- add my comment; > >- manually add into the address list the person I am replying to, since > >it won't be there by default and I'm not even sure whether he/she'll be > >reading the global list; > >- presumably add some text to explain what I am replying to, since no > >one on that list will have seen the message before. > > > >Do you really think that this is a reasonable proposal? > > > >Also, is this list (the global one) being left to its destiny as Mr. > >Williams' personal dump? If that's the case, I don't see how we can have > >a discussion here either. It's just like the ALAC, rather than putting > >some effort into moderating the list and ensuring a reasonable > >environment for discussion with its community, prefers going away and > >preventing any outside participation. > > > >Regards, > >-- > >vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- > >--------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >At-Large mailing list > >At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… > > > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

ALAC Mailing List Changes - an update
by At-Large Staff Aug. 2, 2008

Aug. 2, 2008

Dear ALAC List members: Earlier today, I emailed you about some of the changes to the worldwide At-Large lists, however, I misunderstood a part of what was intended with respect to the new working committee list. It is actually intended that this list will be viewable via the open archives (and, since the mailing lists are all connected to forums on atlarge.icann.org, you can see the list traffic there too), but not that you would be able to subscribe to it, as per the ALAC resolution at its July meeting, and in line with other similar lists such as the GNSO Council. The following affects on the ALAC lists should be noted: 1. This list, alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.htm> , will effectively be renamed to at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.htm> . The list will no longer be a combination of the working public list of the ALAC and also the worldwide discussion list. It will simply be the worldwide discussion list. As at present, anyone may subscribe to it, and any subscriber may post to it. PLEASE NOTE that the limitation rule on the number of recipients in any message sent to this list to be accepted (not bounced or moderated) will remain at no MORE than 5. 2. A new list, called alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.htm> , will be created. It will be read/write for ALAC members, RALO secretariats/chairs, and ALAC liaisons and read-only for everyone else. This will be the main working list of ALAC. Anyone may review the archives at http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/ or via the read-only forum available from http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/forum/204. Separately, there is one new list: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.htm> , which is being set up now. This list will be for community announcements which are relevant to the entire worldwide community. Staff and to-be-designated members of the ALAC (including the ALAC Executive Committee of the Chair, Vice-Chairs, and Rapporteur) will be able to post to it. I have also been asked to remind you of the fact that there is another list, ALAC-Internal, which is a closed list intended to be used primarily for administrivia, coordinating travel, meeting times, and other things of a non-substantive or confidential nature. When will the changes take place? The changes to this list will take place Friday morning at approximately 10:00 Eastern Time (UTC 5). The transition should not take long; if an email gets sent during the changeover it is expected that it will be queued and go through after the technicians finish their work. Other Important Facts: 1. If you are subscribed to the ALAC list at the time of the change, you will be subscribed to the At-Large list once it is created. All of the current ALAC list archives will also be available, as they are being renamed along with the list and its configuration. 2. If you are subscribed to the ALAC list, you will also be subscribed to the ALAC-Announce list (it is being configured as we speak; many of you will already have received your subscription notification) of course you can unsubscribe yourself whenever you wish. 3. All Authorised ALS representatives will be subscribed to the ALAC-Announce list once the changeover is complete. This will make it much easier for community leaders and staff to reach every ALS representative with one email. Any discussion which you wish to have on what you receive would need to be redirected to one of the RALO lists, or the global discussion-only list, as you think relevant. Please let us know if you have any concerns or questions. We hope you will find that these are helpful, and in particular that they help to ensure that you are able to follow the business of the community more effectively than may have been the case as a subscriber to the previous list. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

4 3

Resend of: GOOGLE SUED FOR SELLING INADEQUATE ADS
by Jeffrey A. Williams Aug. 1, 2008

Aug. 1, 2008

All, Seems yet again Google has decided to hoist upon users more nonsense/shanagans. Vint, perhaps in your evanglissm role, you can impress upon Mr. Schmidt that such behavior is not a healthy thing and should be discontinued forthwith. Thank you for your efforts in this regard in advance, and I am hopeful that you will be succesful in addressing this problem with a cease of these activities as the only vaable and proper resolution. See: On July 11th, attorney Hal K. Levitte sued Google for selling low-quality advertisements on parked domains and error pages. Levitte advertised his legal services using Googles programs last year. 15.3% of his ad campaign was taken up by parked domains, which are web pages with automated links related to a predetermined search keyword. Levitte had 202,528 impressions on parked domain pages, with 668 clicks and zero conversions. For the lack of results, Levitte sued Google for fraud, business code violations, and unjust enrichment. The lawsuit was filed as a class action, as Levittes attorneys hope to represent others in the same situation. Just six days later, on July 17th, RK West, a company that does business as Malibu Sales, sued Google for the same reasons as Levitte. The second complaint alleges that Google uses ads on parked domains to launder invalid clicks on websites that have no content. The complaint claims that because Google charges customers for every click, regardless of validity, it benefits from the ads on parked domains while the customer does not. The RK West complaint may be found at http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/5:20… The Levitte complaint may be found at http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/5:20… Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Report to the ICANN Board of Directors from WG onGNSOCouncil Restructuring
by Jeffrey A. Williams Aug. 1, 2008

Aug. 1, 2008

Dominik and all, Exactly my broader point, Dominik! What's much more important is that non-registrant users and independent registrants still have no voice or vote. The capture to which I alluded to and you plainly stated, remains. As such, the ecommerce aspects of economic prosperity will be so limited. Such a limit will be significant and solely or mostly in the hands of large commercial special interest groups. That's not a healthy economic paradigm. It is also a precursor to further fraud and abuse on a huge international scale. Dominik Filipp wrote: > Jeff, > > You are right, however, if we got rid of the percentage (as mentioned in > the Alan's explanation) and kept just raw vote numbers the situation > might get better. I do not see any reason why the contracted parties > should have similar power as the non-contracted parties, for other > reasons than keeping ICANN captured, of course. > > Dominik > > -----Original Message----- > From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey A. > Williams > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 9:32 AM > To: ALAC; ALAC NA Discuss > Cc: Peter Dengate Thrush; twomey(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [At-Large] Report to the ICANN Board of Directors from WG > onGNSOCouncil Restructuring > > Dominik and all, > > If the below outlined report is correct, than it is clear that > commercial interests have a significant advantage and the majority of > power in the GNSO as Registries and Registrars are essentially > commercial entities/businesses. Ergo no balance and essentially nothing > has changed in the GNSO other than the "Names" of the specific > representative groups. Further there is NO Independent Registrant > representative in this proposed structure, and NO user-non-registrant > reoresentative/ALAC. > > So I will now predict that there will be no significant change in the > bahavior of Registries or Registrars and the abuses that have been > occuring with increasing frequency will continue with even more > increasing frequency. I will also predict here and now that with this > proposed structure the IPC will get whatever it wants. > > Dominik Filipp wrote: > > > Cheryl, > > > > After having read the last WG output at > > > > > https://st.icann.org/data/workspaces/alac/attachments/at_large_advisory_ > > > > committee:20080729041513-0-3574/files/FinalReport-GNSO-ImprovementsWG.pd > > > f > > > > it seems like the proposed GNSO restructuralization could be as > follows > > (Attachment A) > > > > ------------------------------ > > 2 houses - contracted and non-contracted > > parties/constituencies, 2 parties > > in each house > > > > House 1 - Contracted party house consists > > of 2 (registry and registrar) constituencies House 2 - > > Non-contracted party house consists > > of 2 (commercial and non-commercial) > > parties/constituencies > > > > that is, 4 parties/constituencies in both the houses collectively. > > > > The GNSO Council (given that the lowest proposed number of members are > > > considered) > > > > House 1 > > Registries - 3 members > > Registrars - 3 members > > > > House 2 > > Commercial - 5 members > > Non-commercial - 5 members > > > > and also > > > > Equal number of votes between registries and registrars. > > Equal number of votes between commercial and non-commercial users. > > ------------------------------ > > > > Do I understand the proposal correctly, Cheryl? > > > > If so, there is a question I could not find an answer to. > > > > Q: What is the proposed number of votes for each of the four GNSO > > Council parties? > > > > Thanks > > > > Dominik > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Cheryl > > Langdon-Orr > > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 7:06 AM > > To: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > Cc: 'ALAC internal list' > > Subject: [At-Large] Report to the ICANN Board of Directors from WG on > > GNSOCouncil Restructuring > > > > At-Large. please note that earlier today the ALAC Executive and our > > representative on this WG Alan Greenberg, met and discussed our desire > > > to have a formal ALAC Statement to the Board on this matter. > > > > > > > > Please see our Wiki page > > https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?at_large_advisory_committee to > find > > a link to the report of the WG from this now completed process, and > > also under Announcements to find an short background piece from the > > report and a note as to the mechanism for the ALAC to review our > > sub-committee and Rep statement appended to it, to be endorsed (in an > > expanded form if so desired) as an ALAC Statement to the Board. > > > > > > > > ALAC this serves as the start of the 7 day minimum notice required > for > > a formal vote to be taken (between meetings) on this matter and in the > > > next 24hrs further background documents and proposed expansion of this > > > statement will be posted and a Big Pulse vote be created for the > purpose > > of recording your views to 1. Endorse the proposed document an ALAC > > Statement, 2. Vote against the proposal or 3. Abstain. > > > > > > > > More in the next 24hrs. > > > > > > > > CLO > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ALAC mailing list > > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann > > > .org > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ALAC mailing list > > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann > .org > > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Apple Clients Still Vulnerable After DNS Patch
by Jeffrey A. Williams Aug. 1, 2008

Aug. 1, 2008

All, All is still not well with Apple.com even after Apple finnaly patched the original DNS problem. It seems that industry leaders are again showing their lack of knowledge in IT related issues that effect the security of their clients and who knows how many other unsuspecting users. Shame on Apple! Has the ISC or the SSAC gotten in touch with Apple and expressed that they need to do better? Well I don't know, but it sure doesn't seem so. See: Glenn Fleishman sends word that SANS Institute testing indicates that, even after installing http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/01/1215209&tid=172 Apple's latest patch for the DNS vulnerability, http://db.tidbits.com/article/9721 Leopard desktops (not servers) are still vulnerable or at least perpetuate risky behavior that makes exploitation easier. This matters because "With servers rapidly being patched worldwide, it's likely that the low-hanging fruit disappears, and vectors [will be] designed to attack massive numbers of clients on ISP networks." Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Aug. 1, 2008

Aug. 1, 2008

Total of 42 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Aug 1 00:53:01 EDT 2008 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 42.86% | 18 | 47.23% | 156437 | jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com 7.14% | 3 | 7.38% | 24451 | dominik.filipp at dsoft.sk 7.14% | 3 | 6.84% | 22670 | staff at atlarge.icann.org 7.14% | 3 | 6.82% | 22582 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 7.14% | 3 | 6.33% | 20980 | cheryl at hovtek.com.au 4.76% | 2 | 3.48% | 11515 | michele at blacknight.ie 2.38% | 1 | 3.29% | 10902 | dthompson at gov.nu.ca 2.38% | 1 | 2.77% | 9164 | annette.muehlberg at web.de 2.38% | 1 | 2.31% | 7644 | carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm 2.38% | 1 | 2.31% | 7641 | brenbe at consumer.org 2.38% | 1 | 2.14% | 7102 | nick.ashton-hart at icann.org 2.38% | 1 | 2.09% | 6937 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 2.38% | 1 | 1.97% | 6515 | narten at us.ibm.com 2.38% | 1 | 1.76% | 5832 | jefsey at jefsey.com 2.38% | 1 | 1.69% | 5610 | veni at veni.com 2.38% | 1 | 1.58% | 5241 | evan at telly.org --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 42 |100.00% | 331223 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ga] Notice: Another DNS security hole recognized
by Jeffrey A. Williams July 31, 2008

July 31, 2008

Dr. Joe and all, Thanks for your input and opinion. Most of it I fully agree with. Indeed true that this problem isn't DNS itself, but how NAT is using randomizing port use. I also to a degree that DNSSEC can be a problem and if not fully implimented properly, can, and likely will be a significant maintanance as well as administration problem. But that is not a DNSSEC problem unto itself. I've done several DNSSEC implimentations that have low or no maint problems. Joe Baptista wrote: > Just to make things clear. > > 1) The DNS is not the issue here. The issue is servers / firewall / > NAT devices where the ports are not properly randomized for UDP. And > the problems can be fixed. > > 2) This is not a new vulnerability. Its one vulnerability with many > potential attack scenarios. I've considered that even authoritative > servers can be exploited if one understands the attack vectors to > deploy. > > If people want to fix this the only real solution is to install a > server that works - Bersteins DNS server is the only one I would > guarantee to clients works well for recursive and authoritative DNS. > Separate servers - separate level of DNS services. > > People who use recursive name servers for authoritative traffic are > begging trouble to pay them a visit. i.e. you get your servers high > jacked. And you won't even know it. > > What pisses me off about Vixie is the shitty way he is using a very > scary vulnerability - i.e. potentially 70% (or more) of the internet > can be high jacked - to peddle his shabby wares - i.e. DNSSEC. > > DNSSEC is nothing more then the Verisign/USG/IANA/ICANN disaster > attempting a takeover of the root zone, or at least maintaining the > status quo. Let us not forget that the Chinese now have a > significant market share, then there was Turkey who I got online via > the HEX, and the Arabs have been running their own roots for years, > etc etc. So having lost over 30% market share in root service is not > a success. > > DNSSEC is nothing more then a trap that will delay is for a few > months. It is also a significant inconvenience and will require an IT > infrastructure devoted to its administration and maintenance. i.e. > big expenses to all when the problem is and always has been the > software - i.e. BIND and all its variants. > > Fix the software - fix the problem today. Install DNSSEC - ensure a > make work project for DNS experts - and increase IT expenses > significantly. > > anyway - thats my two cents. > > regards > joe baptista > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Jeffrey A. > Williams <jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > All, > > As if one was not enough, eh! Well like I have been > harping > on, here is another that has finally been recognized that > has > been around for awhile as well... > > Seems that the ISC hasn't fixed or reported this one > either... >:( > > Here also is a new tool for users or admins. to check with: > > https://www.dns-oarc.net/oarc/services/dnsentropy > > > 08.31.22 CVE: CVE-2008-1447 > Platform: Cross Platform > Title: Multiple Vendor DNS Protocol Insufficient Transaction > ID > Randomization DNS Spoofing > Description: Multiple vendors' implementations of the DNS > protocol are > exposed to a DNS-spoofing issue because the software fails > to securely > implement random values when performing DNS queries. > Microsoft Windows > DNS Clients and Servers, ISC BIND 8 and 9, and multiple > Cisco IOS > releases are affected. > Ref: http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/494716 > > > Regards, > > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k > members/stakeholders strong!) > "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - > Abraham Lincoln > > "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with > what is > very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt > > "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the > burden, B; > liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied > by > P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." > United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. > 1947] > ===== > ========================================================= > Updated 1/26/04 > CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data > security IDNS. > div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. > ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail > jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com > My Phone: 214-244-4827 > > > > > > -- > Joe Baptista > www.publicroot.org > PublicRoot Consortium > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, > Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) > Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084 > > Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0