|
Grex > Coop11 > #47: Banning a site from Grex; a discussion of when to do this | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 264 responses total. |
aruba
|
|
response 75 of 264:
| 
Dec 4 03:27 UTC 1998 |
The message sent via e-mail should probably contain a pointer to this item as
well.
|
steve
|
|
response 76 of 264:
|
Dec 4 05:07 UTC 1998 |
I've just sent off another letter to my contact about this.
Given that it is in the middle of the day there, I am hoping to
get a response. If not, then tomorrow I guess we'll go ahead
with the mail and reopening. I'll post the letter to all the
users here, first.
|
rtg
|
|
response 77 of 264:
|
Dec 4 05:38 UTC 1998 |
I find it hard to believe that this university gives its students telnet
access to the internet, and not an email server. STeve, if you have a
list of all accounts which were created from that subnet, how difficult
would it be to scan the .plan files of those accounts for alternate e-mail
addresses? If a significant number of the users have alternate e-mail,
then I would see it as unnecessary to unblock the subnet, and instead send
the explanatory e-mail direct to the alternate addresses.
Second, you did not explain exactly how the blocking was accomplished.
Does our router have some firewall filtering ability? If so, can it
filter by protocol as well as IP address? Would it be possible to open
the subnet to http traffic, so the affected users could read this
discussion via backtalk? If we do chose to unblock the site, how about
allowing telnet, but no FTP? THen they'd have to hand-key the source for
their bombs, at least. And it wouldn't impede the 'legitimate' users of
mail, party, and bbs.
|
steve
|
|
response 78 of 264:
|
Dec 4 15:24 UTC 1998 |
Rick, India is a very very different place. I can readily believe
it. I have a list, and some of them have alternate listings for email.
The actual block is being done with the Tcp Wrapper package, and
telnet, ftp, rlogin and finger are being blocked. Http access is not
being blocked, but they don't have many machines there that can do
that, as I understand it.
One of the reasons Grex is so popular, is that we're tremendously
well connected compared to them. We have a fast connection(!) such
that its extremely attractive to use us. So if they do have ready
email access there, it may well be the case that mail can arrive
here many times faster.
|
steve
|
|
response 79 of 264:
|
Dec 4 15:42 UTC 1998 |
I sent another mail off to the contact person. They are trying
to contact the people at the actual site, but so far they haven't
made a connection yet.
|
mta
|
|
response 80 of 264:
|
Dec 4 16:00 UTC 1998 |
My understanding from some conversations I've had with several gentlemen from
universities and corporations in India is that generally there is one e-mail
account for everyone and you find your mail by scanning the subject line for
your name. No privacy at all.
That was a couple of years ago,m and it may have changed -- but maybe not,
or maybe not everywhere.
|
senna
|
|
response 81 of 264:
|
Dec 4 16:12 UTC 1998 |
If that's the case, that would fully explain the desire to get email on here,
although I'm still not comfortable with grex being used as little more than
a giant email server.
|
krj
|
|
response 82 of 264:
|
Dec 4 17:30 UTC 1998 |
I should stop responding. I'm in a sour mood today.
|
jiffer
|
|
response 83 of 264:
|
Dec 4 18:23 UTC 1998 |
That makes wonderful sense to use a place like grex. However, let me put this
is simple terms for Richard's sake, if someone (or some people) are going to
harm grex, or potentially harm grex, then we should, at best block that site.
Its like in elemmentary school when Tommy wouldn't shut up in class so you
all had to write an essay. There, an comparison for those that didn't get
the logic of normal thought.
Well, hopefully the contact people did something about it so that it will be
fixed, otherwise I am sure its back to reblocking. =/
But there are several places to get free email, hopefully people will find
them.
|
steve
|
|
response 84 of 264:
|
Dec 4 18:43 UTC 1998 |
As I understand it, the contact people are establishing contact with
the administrators at the particular site.
|
steve
|
|
response 85 of 264:
|
Dec 4 18:46 UTC 1998 |
If I'm reading peoples thoughts correctly, we should re-open the site
after I've written tha mail to be sent to all accounts (and reviewed here)
and put a message in the MOTD.
Correct? If so, I'll be starting this tonight when I get home.
|
dpc
|
|
response 86 of 264:
|
Dec 4 19:23 UTC 1998 |
Correct.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 87 of 264:
|
Dec 4 19:39 UTC 1998 |
ASAP, please.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 88 of 264:
|
Dec 4 20:50 UTC 1998 |
Yes, #85 is what I understood we agreed to.
|
scg
|
|
response 89 of 264:
|
Dec 4 23:10 UTC 1998 |
I disagree. I don't think it would be a good idea to reopen stufff to that
site before we have confirmation that the administrators there are dealing
with the problem. This site was not blocked as a punative measure, where the
sentance would have a definite duration. This site was blocked because it
was becoming impossible to have Grex function well for the rest of its users
while allowing that site to access us. At this point, we have somebody
upstream from there saying he's trying to contact people, but we still haven't
gotten any response from administrators actually at that site. We certainly
haven't gotten any confirmation that anything to improve the situation is
being done. As far as I can tell, the situation that cuased us to need this
block really hasn't changed. It's looking like it may, and when it does, of
course we should open things back up.
|
mdw
|
|
response 90 of 264:
|
Dec 4 23:16 UTC 1998 |
It is trivial to type in a fork bomb. This response is *much* larger
than a fork bomb. Blocking ftp will not impede any vandal wanting to
run a fork bomb on grex.
|
aruba
|
|
response 91 of 264:
|
Dec 4 23:54 UTC 1998 |
Re #89: But if we open up the link for a bit, and let the people from that
site see their mail, they will get the message we've worded here and then
hopefully pressure their administrators into taking action. In other words,
opening up the site again is a way to accomplish the goal of getting something
done about the vandals.
|
remmers
|
|
response 92 of 264:
|
Dec 5 01:11 UTC 1998 |
Re resp:89 - The reason for reopening is not because anybody thinks
the problem is solved.
|
scg
|
|
response 93 of 264:
|
Dec 5 01:34 UTC 1998 |
I know we're not opening this up because anybody thinks the problem is solved.
That's what I'm objecting to.
|
steve
|
|
response 94 of 264:
|
Dec 5 03:50 UTC 1998 |
I hear what Steve is saying.
Are there other people who agree that this shouldn't be lifted?
I'm working on the mail anyway.
|
steve
|
|
response 95 of 264:
|
Dec 5 04:24 UTC 1998 |
I'm talking to someone from IIT now; it's VERY interesting.
I'll report when I'm done.
|
krj
|
|
response 96 of 264:
|
Dec 5 05:32 UTC 1998 |
My own cynical belief is that we will lift the site ban; some vandal
from that site will attack grex again; and we will reimpose the site
ban. However, as there seem to be 1000+ Grex users from this site --
presumably at least some of them nice people -- we need to lift the
ban, at least for a little while, to explain what has happened to
them, and to allow the legitimate users to download their e-mail and
make other arrangements.
And this is another reason to use the MOTD to communicate with the users
at this site: composing and sending the e-mail is adding days to the
interruption these users are seeing. The ban has been on for a week;
it would be good if Grex were prepared to lift the ban for Monday
morning, Indian time.
|
mdw
|
|
response 97 of 264:
|
Dec 5 05:55 UTC 1998 |
Would you like to be one of the people who cleans up after fork bombs?
|
steve
|
|
response 98 of 264:
|
Dec 5 06:10 UTC 1998 |
Well, I got the name of the director of computing, and what may
be a good email address for this person. I'm going to see if that
does any good.
There apparently is a mail machine there, but the person I talked
to just got mail dated November 17th, today. Small wonder then, given
the glacial speed of the machine that they'd be trying to use anything
else.
|
krj
|
|
response 99 of 264:
|
Dec 5 06:35 UTC 1998 |
No, I do not want to be the person who cleans up after fork bombs.
Yes, I realize that I am asking you, the staff, to clean up after
one more inevitable fork bomb from this site, for the cause of
sending a message to a very very large number of grex users.
I'm not going to go to the mat for this, though; but other responses
in this item have convinced me that Grex owes this large block of
users the minimum politeness of explaining the termination of
our relationship.
Here's some off the wall proposals. Disable the C compiler for a couple
of days. Disable newuser for connections originating from this site,
and move the users from this site into a group whose permissions
are drastically cut.
|