discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
Subject: Discuss mailing list
List archive
- From: Jeff Taylor <shdwdrgn AT sourpuss.net>
- To: discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
- Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 16:10:31 -0600
- Authentication-results: mx2.computerrehab.us; dmarc=none header.from=sourpuss.net
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.0 mx2.computerrehab.us A41C42D7B9
We should actually consider that. Currently it requires a valid
login to view the blacklist data that opennic members are using... Requiring authentication to read the data doesn't inhibit access -- you can still write a simple script to retrieve the data. This does prevent random unknown access to the information. My concern with making the data fully public is that someone writes a bot which changes domains as rapidly as we post new blacklist entries. Perhaps there is a minimal chance of this happening, but it *could*. Or the data could be used for some other nefarious reason. Is there any beneficial reason to make the data available without a login? The only thing I can think of off hand is that regular users may wish to see what is being blocked, but this is what should be discussed. There may be many pros and cons to requiring authentication to access the data, so we should decide which way we want to go with it. There are other options as well. For example, I want to add new code to the servers page so that each admin can mark exactly which blacklists they are applying to their DNS server. This allows visitors to quickly see if someone is using a spamhaus list or some other data, however it opens up another possibility. The servers page already allows logins, so if an admin marks that they are using certain blacklists, I could also make the servers page show the contents of those blacklists AFTER a user has logged in. That way all of the server information is still in one place and we still have authentication for viewing the data. On 08/24/2017 04:30 AM, Wil wrote:
You did tell
about this. And after some consideration, that’s exactly what I
did. At least to remain in line with my ISP (OVH).
spamhaus is providing us with information on the .bit domains they consider 'bad' In fact, i was
wondering if those informations were public somehow ?
Thanks again for
your time.
Wil.
|
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, (continued)
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/06/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Al Beano, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Calum McAlinden, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Verax, 08/03/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/03/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Verax, 08/03/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Calum McAlinden, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, opennic, 08/23/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Wil, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jonah Aragon, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Verax, 08/25/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jonah Aragon, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Wil, 08/24/2017
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.