funsec mailing list archives
Re: Feds after Google data
From: Dude VanWinkle <dudevanwinkle () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:55:05 -0500
On 1/19/06, Drsolly <drsollyp () drsolly com> wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Fergie wrote:Regarding said domain, what makes you think that some unscrupulous people won't conduct nefarious activities in that TLD? Or conversely, what makes someone think that all pr0n would move to .xxx?
If you put enough thought into a plan, it usually can be accomplished.
The answer: there is no assurance -- there is no Internet police.
DoS whitehouse.gov, and put up a kiddie porn site in the .com domain, then tell me that again ;-). There are Internet police, they are running wild around the web, maybe if we give em the reigns on a few TLD's they might leave the rest of us alone (they need something easy yet important to do to keep 'em busy and feeling appreciated) Todd: have you been successful in keeping pr0n out of your subnets and away from the clients cache? Can an OCR recognize boobies? I bet they could. ;-)
To think so is an exercise is fantasy. ;-)
Shoot, my fantasy is to think about excercise
This is the theory "If you build it, they will go there", somewhat related to that other, better-known fantasy "If you build it, they will come".
No this is the theory that kids are one of the biggest sources of income (whether thats good or not is another mailing list), and that if you make people jump through godawful hoops to get to them, they will. Hoops to include: Allowing colleges and schools first priority in posting content and registering domains, the process would be easier for initial registration for .edu and .gov ppl. This would build up the content and pave the way for interested parties. Require kids to go through an online-self-defence training course (on online stalkers and how to report suspected ppl, etc) before getting to the portals or namespace. Companies who wanted to publish content for financial gain would have to deposit enough capitol to make it worth their while _not_ to post pr0n or inappropriate content. If no capitol was available (startup) then perhaps a percentage of sales would go into the escrow account. As an added bonus, this escrow account could be used to generate income for schools via interest or some such. Giving webbots the ability to pull sites, with the webbots 2nd cousins handling the "I am soooo sorry about that mistake my friend made" after accidentally pulling a legitimate site. deur I dunno, but there are ways to make that work. Shoot, just give: disney, cartoon network, and nickelodeon the "first registration" and kids would flock to it. Mebe have an exclusive barney album release to generate interest, but kids arent hard to manipulate (just ask ad exec's: shiny things work best... well.. best next to sex... which is why a .kids is needed in the first place :-( BACK TO THE FUN! -JP "Big Bird scared the $hit outta me when I was a kid" -JP _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- Feds after Google data Richard M. Smith (Jan 19)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Feds after Google data Blanchard, Michael (InfoSec) (Jan 19)
- RE: Feds after Google data Fergie (Jan 19)
- Re: Feds after Google data Dude VanWinkle (Jan 19)
- Re: Feds after Google data Fergie (Jan 19)
- Re: Feds after Google data Drsolly (Jan 19)
- XXX tld? userfriendly's take [was: Feds after Google data] Gadi Evron (Jan 19)
- Re: Feds after Google data Dude VanWinkle (Jan 19)
- Re: Feds after Google data Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 19)
- Re: Feds after Google data Dude VanWinkle (Jan 19)
- Re: Feds after Google data Alex Shipp (elist) (Jan 20)
- Re: Feds after Google data Drsolly (Jan 19)
- Re: Feds after Google data Jim Murray (Jan 19)
- Re: Feds after Google data David Lodge (Jan 20)
- Re: Feds after Google data Dude VanWinkle (Jan 20)
- Re: Feds after Google data Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 20)
- Re: Feds after Google data Dude VanWinkle (Jan 20)
- RE: Feds after Google data Drsolly (Jan 20)