| View previous topic :: View next topic ? |
| Author |
Message |
Asmo
Site Admin
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Posts: 838
Location: Undernet
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:35 am?? ?Post subject: DALnet acts upon XXX password sharing
|
 |
|
Since a few days channel managers of XXX password channels on DALnet have been directed to read this page. "You have been directed to this page because you are listed as founder on a channel which has been reported to us as a location where passwords for adult sites are traded", the page starts.
Only channel managers of channels which have been found actively trading XXX passwords are directed to this page. DALnet's AUP section III disallow the exchange of private information such as logins. In a reaction to IRC-Junkie DALnet admin Ahnberg pointed out that it is not specifically XXX passwords which are being targeted. "I just emphasize that we're not doing things to censor particular content, we're acting on a general level. i.e. just because there were a bunch of XXX-pass-trading channels alerted due to this we do not single them out. We treat everyone equally. If we were to find channels who spread login information for sites with info for bird-watchers, we would act on that too."
We asked Ahnberg if the closure means disallowing all access to a channel, or just removal of services. "AFAIK the channels have not yet been acted upon, but yes, they will be entirely blocked in this case since their sole purpose has been to trade personal information of individuals without their consent" Ahnberg explains.
"We're not actively monitoring or "hunting" things down", Ahnberg explains. "We usually act on reports or when something stick out."
Thanks to Garp who initially pointed me out to this.
_________________
Asmo
webmaster www.IRC-Junkie.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mentality
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 34
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2004 11:58 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
Excellent! (and 'finally!')
Regards,
_________________
Mentality/Chris
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phase
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 45
Location: TN, USA
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 4:16 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Yeah, about time some things are done about this. I hope Undernet follows dalnet in removing channels of those type.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 151
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 4:36 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
| Phase wrote: |
| Yeah, about time some things are done about this. I hope Undernet follows dalnet in removing channels of those type. |
Lets not forget that DALnet was under the advisement of the FBI, perhaps it wasn't prudent to do so until now.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phase
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 45
Location: TN, USA
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 5:05 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
Ahh, that might have had something to do with it 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BarkerJr
Joined: 31 Oct 2004
Posts: 33
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 6:41 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Really, though. If they're "not actively monitoring" for this kind of stuff, how's this any different than before?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Asmo
Site Admin
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Posts: 838
Location: Undernet
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 8:19 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
| BarkerJr wrote: |
| Really, though. If they're "not actively monitoring" for this kind of stuff, how's this any different than before? |
We do still have to remember that IRC networks are held up by volunteers. Saying you will actiely monitor and chase any illegal trading/sharing channels will mean you need to quadruple or so your manpower. I really dont see this happening.
Then there is the thing that many IRC networks see them as a 'common carrier'. You can compare that to telephony. You have many telephone operators around the works who link up to eachother, and provide a telephone enwtork to talk over. But they do not monitor and moderate the talk which is being done over their networks (in fact, in most civilised countries it forbids them by privacy laws).
_________________
Asmo
webmaster www.IRC-Junkie.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 151
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:58 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Really, though. If they're "not actively monitoring" for this kind of stuff, how's this any different than before?
|
You also have to remember that IRCops in general are not cops nor any other type of law enforcement. Therefore if they were to download any questionable files to prove that there are indeed laws being broken, they too have broken the law. Then there is the question of jurisdiction.
Unless you know of a way to prove illegal activities are actually taking place without downloading the files in question, then there isn't a way to "actively monitor" the channel. The only thing you can say is that files with questionable names are being requested in a channel with a questionable name, but that proves nothing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BarkerJr
Joined: 31 Oct 2004
Posts: 33
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 2:00 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
|
That's my point. They're just responding to reports of illegal activities, which is what they, and most networks, have been doing for years.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 151
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 2:08 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
| BarkerJr wrote: |
| That's my point. They're just responding to reports of illegal activities, which is what they, and most networks, have been doing for years. |
So has DALnet. However the FBI should be doing the monitoring .. not network staff. My point is that DALnet shouldn't be held in bad light because "they just now closed the channels" Based on my information it was DALnet that made the first move years ago and called the FBI.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mite
Joined: 30 Oct 2004
Posts: 107
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 2:12 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
appears asthough dalnet isnt taking action against these channels... just letting the managers know their channels are on the list... and to watch out
i see that as a positive thing for these people.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Asmo
Site Admin
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Posts: 838
Location: Undernet
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 9:37 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
| katsklaw wrote: |
| However the FBI should be doing the monitoring .. |
So the FBI sees a person with @my.c00l.vh0st.org swap advertise his fileserver, or exchange a xxx pass with user X who has @but.mine.is.l33t3r.org
FBI only has jurisdiction in the US. Aside of that, got any idea how many kiddies around the world use badly configured proxies from US based homemachine's? Just check out any lame channel flood and you got an idea...
_________________
Asmo
webmaster www.IRC-Junkie.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mentality
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 34
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 4:17 pm?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Lets not forget that DALnet was under the advisement of the FBI, perhaps it wasn't prudent to do so until now. |
Where has DALnet ever said it's under the advisement of the FBI to take any of the actions that it has?
From the DALnet website regarding the original banning of mass file trading channels:
| Quote: |
Q. Is some group/organization forcing you to do this?
A. No. This is completely an internal decision. DALnet values its resources and the donated time, bandwidth, and equipment that it receives. DALnet wishes to ensure that those resources are used for their original purposes, to sustain a network where people can chat with other people. This is an effort to reduce the wasting of those resources on other activities. |
And from their website related to their more recent decision:
| Quote: |
| Trading login information on IRC violates several areas of our Acceptable Use Policy. |
Regards,
_________________
Mentality/Chris
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 151
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 2:51 am?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
Do you believe everything you read? Besides that question is in regards to the CHOICE of removing those channels .. that does not in any means say that the FBI was not involved.
Example: DALnet calls FBI .. FBI does whatever they want ... FBI says ok do whatever you want to those channels, we have our info ... DAL then chooses to close the channels.
| Quote: |
Where has DALnet ever said it's under the advisement of the FBI to take any of the actions that it has?
|
As a former DALnet staff member, I don't need to rely solely on DALnet's website for information. In other words, just because it's not on their website, don't mean it didn't happen. Also, I never said that DALnet was under the advisement of the FBI as to what to do with the channels. Perhaps they were simply seeking guidance as to what course and what legal options they had. I didn't say that the FBI was pulling DALnet's strings ... I simply said that they were under the advisement of the FBI and that perhaps the FBI didn't want DALnet to take action yet.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hjorten
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 9
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 2:47 pm?? ?Post subject:
|
|
|
Seems like DALnet removed that html file.
_________________
Listen to my hooves
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
???
