Are we really going to repeat the blatant stupidity of spammers 15-20 years ago who tried to file SLAPP ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation) suits against DNSBL ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Name_System_blocklist) operators? Did we learn nothing from history?
Please have your lawyers review the Spamhaus lawsuit, and other state and federal lawsuits filed by spammers against DNSBL operators (like me!) before you file a SLAPP suit. We always win. We win so much it's getting boring. Our state and federal courts have ruled in every case I am aware of that publishing lists of hosts who violate or have violated the behavioral norms of the Internet and society at large is protected under 47 USC 230’s good samaritan clause (c)(2)(A) and (B). In fact my right to publish a list that says your IPs, IP blocks, DNS, or any other technical means of identifying your content or traffic as not reputable EXCEEDS your constitutional rights to protected speech. During the 2004 and 2008 US presidential elections we reputation listed both major parties' presidential campaigns for sending unsolicited bulk email. Their legal recourse was to go away and deal with it. When a major email provider was in a very long beta, and it was exploited to send CSAM randomly around the internet, we reputation listed it. Reputation lists are protected speech. Anyone who wishes to use these lists may do so for any reason they wish, or none at all. Legal threats with no merit in law are "otherwise objectionable" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cartooney. You are actually quite lucky that my list isn't still operating. We routinely reputation listed sources of idiotic legal threats (cartooneys https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cartooney). Getting out of that reputation list required a public apology made in the same forum where the original cartooney was published. It baffles my mind that anyone would stand up and publicly announce that they wish to be counted with spammers. Obviously none of this is legal advice, but since this is going to be archived in Google in a day or so, it should save the attorneys who are going to respond to your cartooney time in composing their reply. In summation don't threaten reputation list providers. You will lose every time. Andrew Kirch Former owner of the Abusive Hosts Blocking List On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 9:25 PM Eric C. Miller via NANOG < nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote: > We're still playing whack a mole with our IP space. I've asked our > corporate counsel about sending demand letters with an accusation of > tortious interference. > > IP Quality Score seems to be a big nuisance. Check a few of your IPs on > their website. > > No silver bullets though. > > Eric > > > ________________________________ > From: paul--- via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 10:18:55 AM > To: nanog@lists.nanog.org <nanog@lists.nanog.org> > Cc: paul@vanilla.capetown <paul@vanilla.capetown> > Subject: Amazon AWS cloudfront WAF block > > Hi all > > Most if not all of our prefixes are on some sort of AWS WAF deny list, > that or our ASN is listed. > > We are an eyeball network, geo-location websites e.g maxmind are correctly > displaying the correct location and services for our prefixes. > > We do not have a support contract with amazon aws to create a support > ticket. Various websites are now blocked, e.g Reddit and many more. It is > not feasible for us to reach out to each one to adjust their aws waf > filters. > > Upon emailing AWS this is their reply: > > "The best course of action would be to contact Neustar and or MaxMind who > are 3rd party WAF aggregators on this to address any issues with WAF > blocking." > > This is also not fair and frankly a rabbit hole we do not want to go down. > These are also paid for services. AWS is almost holding our ASN/Prefixes as > hostage to these paid for services with no easy way to check why we are > being blocked, and getting off "some" list. > > Anyone have an idea / contact or what to do? > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/NC6Q4WG7MORBQWH5BAPOHR7XK5H56OTU/ > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/K7TEXONRYLQWZPUDTOPQ5SI5WFZJ6TAM/ > _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/TVB6GRMPRTUHNEDL6VGMEUIMOKDTEUQ7/
