“We checked the website you are trying to access for malicious and spear-phishing content and found it likely to be unsafe.”
perhaps charter thinks there's a reason to not permit folks to access a possibly dangerous site? (it's also possible it just got cough up amongst some other stuff in the hosting provider's space, nothing jumps out in passive-dns lokoups.) On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 7:39 PM William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 4:00 PM John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote: > > It appears that William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> said: > > >If you can't reach a technical POC, use the legal one. Your lawyer can > > > The only response to a letter like that is "we run our network to > > serve our customers and manage it the way we think is best" and you > > know what, they're right. > > Hi John, > > Respectfully, you're mistaken. Look up "tortious interference." > > Operators have considerable legal leeway to block traffic for cause, > or even by mistake if corrected upon notification, but a lawyer who > blows off a cease-and-desist letter without investigating it with the > tech staff has committed malpractice. The lawyer doesn't want to > commit malpractice. You write the lawyer via certified mail, he's > going to talk to the tech staff and you're going to get a response. At > that point, you have an open communication pathway to get things > fixed. Which was the problem to be solved. > > > > Having said that, I suspect the least bad alternative if you can't > > find an out of band contact is to get some of the Spectrum customers > > who can't reach you to complain. They're customers, you aren't. > > My results going through the support front-door at large companies for > oddball problems have been less than stellar. Has your experience > truly been different? > > Regards, > Bill Herrin > > > -- > William Herrin > b...@herrin.us > https://bill.herrin.us/
