Re: [opennic-discuss] Vote to keep or drop peering with NameCoin

This is a multi-part message in MIME format...

------------=_1561752049-3952-22
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

By the word=E2=80=99s very definition, malware is intended to cause harm. I=
f it doesn=E2=80=99t cause harm, it isn=E2=80=99t malware. What pro-malware=
 argument can be made?

Spamhaus provides lists that networks voluntarily use. Presumably everyone =
could have decided to be blacklisted and accept whatever consequences that =
entails. Freedom is not a one way street.=20
=20=20

> On Jun 27, 2019, at 22:05, Daniel Quintiliani <[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
> I was using my own .bit domains frequently via OpenNIC, before I learned =
the Namecoin way and I do it that way now (which is better anyway for many =
reasons including security).
>=20
> I raised a "who the hell is Spamhaus and why are they telling us what to =
do" back when that happened, and voted against the optional blacklist. Fusl=
 (I think) told me who Spamhaus were and why they mattered to OpenNIC.
>=20
> To me it's part of a greater problem - censorship from companies, especia=
lly in the tech industry, who are more concerned with morality than deliver=
ing a packet to its destination and a profit to their shareholders, in this=
 case the morality of malware, ransom, and spam rather than the morality of=
 political causes, politicians, and conspiracy theories.
>=20
> Don't know if anyone missed this question, I asked during the vote, and n=
obody answered me, the concerns with child pornography and malware that wer=
e brought up, aren't we protected by safe harbor laws like CDA 230 and the =
DMCA, and the equivalent of those in the EU and elsewhere?
>=20
> --
>=20
> -Dan Q
>=20
>=20
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 14:49:45 -0600, Jeff Taylor <[email protected]> w=
rote:
>=20
>> It's actually a little more complex than that.  From what I've been=20
>> hearing it sounds like some members of Namecoin appreciated the service=
=20
>> while others wanted to remain hidden.  There was also quite a bit of=20
>> controversy here on Opennic over the subject.  Because of the anonymous=
=20
>> nature of .bit domains with absolutely no connection to a real person,=20
>> coupled with opennic's distribution making it easy to use those domains,=
=20
>> there were a number of .bit domains being used to send malware and other=
=20
>> questionable content to other people's computers.
>>=20
>> This is where things got ugly...  We've had some long discussions, both=
=20
>> here on the mailing list and on IRC chat.  Basically this centers around=
=20
>> the idea that everyone wants opennic to freely resolve everything as=20
>> intended without any modifications.  However because of the .bit domains=
=20
>> being used to distribute malware they got picked up by Spamhaus and the=
=20
>> mail servers attached to the same IPs as opennic DNS resolvers were then=
=20
>> blacklisted.  We worked with Spamhaus to get a list of the domains they=
=20
>> found problems with, and that's when our own blacklist came to be.  But=
=20
>> this goes against the concept of opennic resolving domains without=20
>> interference.  There was no argument that it should not be Spamhaus's=20
>> place to police the internet, and their methods were essentially holding=
=20
>> some of our servers 'hostage' in an effort to force us to bend to their=
=20
>> will, but there was a lot of debate about whether or not we *should*.=20=
=20
>> The only compromise we could come to was that the decision should be=20
>> left up to the individual T2 operators, with a method of identifying=20
>> which servers were making use of the blacklist data to modify their resu=
lts.
>>=20
>> And so here we are today.  What it came down to was that almost nobody=20
>> in opennic is actually using .bit domains, so a vote was called to see=20
>> if it was worth the effort to keep it around.
>>=20
>> Hope that faithfully summarizes the history?
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> On 06/27/2019 02:16 AM, 'smee wrote:
>>> I also read the list but have yet to contribute anything, and I didn't
>>> vote. This issue and how it came up opened my eyes to a few things. On
>>> the face of it, it seems obvious. They don't want opennic handling .bit
>>> domains and it seems to be of no benefit to opennic to continue doing
>>> so.
>>> Being not that well versed in the subject, I decided to watch the
>>> discussion and learn more, but from the discussion, those two facts
>>> don't seem to have changed.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 22:29 +0200, Al Beano wrote:
>>>> Like many others, I'm also alive and reading the mailing list but
>>>> didn't vote - mainly because I'm away from home and things were going
>>>> in my favour anyway :-)
>>>>=20
>>>> Am 25. Juni 2019 17:48:17 MESZ, schrieb [email protected]:
>>>>> Thanks for the update Jeff.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> So only 15 people are active on opennic =F0=9F=98=B2
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>> -----Mensaje original-----
>>>>> De: [email protected]
>>>>> <[email protected]> En nombre de Jeff Taylor
>>>>> Enviado el: martes, 25 de junio de 2019 09:29 a. m.
>>>>> Para: OpenNIC discussion <[email protected]>
>>>>> Asunto: Re: [opennic-discuss] Vote to keep or drop peering with
>>>>> NameCoin
>>>>>=20
>>>>> With a final vote of 13 to 2, the vote has ended in favor of
>>>>> dropping
>>>>> namecoin from opennic.  I will be updating the glue zone today to
>>>>> remove .bit, and updating the root zone to drop references to
>>>>> namecoin
>>>>> and emercoin.  Thanks to everyone who cast their vote.
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> -------
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>> --------
>>>>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
>>>>> You may unsubscribe by emailing
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>> --------
>>>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
>>>> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]
>>>> ect.org
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> --------
>>>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
>>>> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]=
ct.org
>>=20
>>=20
>> --------
>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.=20
>> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]=
.org
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.=20
> You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected].=
org


------------=_1561752049-3952-22
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit



--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
You may unsubscribe by emailing [email protected]

------------=_1561752049-3952-22--