Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden

[Dave Rand]

[In the message entitled "Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden" on Apr 28, 10:20, "Steve Sobol" writes:]
> There are some basic rules of thumb you can use. The problem is that they're
> not guaranteed to work. The best solution was created years ago (Gordon
> Fecyk's DUL, which lists IP ranges the ISPs specifically register as
> dynamic/not supposed to host servers) and eventually came under the purview of
> Kelkea/MAPS, but there wasn't a ton of ISP buy-in. If we could create a
> similar list and actually get ISPs to register the appropriate netblocks (and
> not mix in IPs where servers are allowed, and IPs where they aren't, in the
> same block), that'd be great.

Dunno what a ton of ISP buy-in is, but the MAPS DUL now contains about
190,000,000 entries.  We've been working on it very hard for the last year or
two.  Most ISP-level subscribers figure it stops a pretty large percentage of
the compromised-home-computer spam.

--