Discuss mailing list

["Chris S (Pei)" <pei AT virtual-dope.com>]

Amen, I have a cron job that calls a script to rm  the logs daily at 
midnight... for my logs info it says deleted every day... Btw: my server 
ip's still aren't in tier 2 reports.

On 2013-06-11 09:11, Kenny Taylor wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On my own domains, I have never expected any level of privacy when I
> create DNS records.  They're public and I'm putting them out there 
> for
> the world to use.
>
> On the DNS server side, if we're looking at logs with obsfucated IP
> addresses and see a questionable pattern, like constant ripe.net ANY
> queries, it seems reasonable to investigate further with the goal of
> blocking the abusive traffic.
>
> Ultimately, the end user has to decide whether to trust the DNS
> server admin.  If we say we obsfucate logs, they put faith in us to 
> do
> so.  If we say raw logs may be reviewed solely to investigate abuse,
> it's also a matter of faith in the admin.
>
> I think if we stick to that strict review only to mitigate abuse
> policy, we're still upholding our commitment to end-user privacy.
>
>
>
> Guillaume Parent <gparent AT gparent.org> wrote:
>
> > You can't avoid the privacy violation here. Either we monitor our
> > servers
> > and we have to occasionally look at record names and IP addresses, or
> > we
> > don't monitor our servers and some of us get shut down for being
> > internet
> > bastards.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Alex Nordlund
> > <deep.alexander AT gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Quinn Wood
> > <wood.quinn.s AT gmail.com>wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Julian DeMarchi
> > > > <julian AT jdcomputers.com.au> wrote:
> > > > > Why would someone have 511 A records for @....
> > > > >
> > > > You've completely missed the point. The point is my distaste with
> > > > someone looking through domain requests and the subsequent advice 
> > > > to
> > > > block access to one just because it's name looked fishy.
> > > >
> > > > If the type of query was what was being acted on, it would have
> > > > already been in a filter and the complaint would have never been
> > made.
> > > > It's a privacy violation masquerading as ok because malicious
> > behavior
> > > > was found..
> > >
> > >
> > > How is it a privacy violation if it's found on the person's (I 
> > > quote)
> > *personal
> > > closed resolver*?
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Alex
> >
> >
> > --------
> > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: APG v1.0.8
>
> iQJDBAEBCAAtBQJRt0wlJhxLZW5ueSBUYXlsb3IgPGtlbm55dGF5bG9yQHJ1bmJv
> eC5jb20+AAoJELOordj4VKFQFXoP+waWS8HglDHVzzHCLrQyIOgIXbbwA1oeioQS
> IbYpoO8/p1JqKSdhxUNigY6v+l0ANpQK0e9e08VBBw/CdGVvzkk0SPR+TofbTshD
> 9LIAC4WpN1WAjgwUCQJKQIgfNaflERQJxBj4M0r8xx4RAxY4pRKENeB8HrMryfDQ
> hE2U7XU6r1QuvSFAK0s9TM+NTB7qtlvzqzVtPCSys5ilHk2gONOBJpm+yDlMSeX9
> vAE17CBB0wO8HDqI3MQOvSAa24q5xr3gFOZWYmcyVzv9si2JCUBv825WdmNg7dT5
> +4V4lCgdJC6h3EPnMq8rlexetOOnl42koqSgWOOU/jlwSNLhZT7RRBU0QrqWULV8
> 8+EYXWBx0H44o87hjMWV+p8m4lSSBeerYwGAwJjcTD4K2AaaivE52fskHYPiuFY9
> NoguVII6flq33GOz8yeS0EgJTE9ysV+vj2B9GogG7Bc5OsI0hJGe7f1phrTQmYHO
> iZRj0QV9VEciP0/dgL+yzrGt1CVYzs8FiF2geq7W61/gml5ixTqtHLFkguq9Guy2
> VmtrKi0YHo8XZk7jJV4bEoBrCESXYT71Rfr3/z1htX1d830k1J/TixIWVVE/p1xN
> nEXBPiQkUujIWhwtmX5t6aIjtQ+OzHXyLhbgLeWX5zgG1H4+9lPNN+WK0AxQ8Fmx
> +c+0rzwx
> =hDH1
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> You may unsubscribe by emailing 
> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org

--
-- Pei