Re: Renesys on 'Internet Vigilantism'

[Nick FitzGerald <nick () virus-l demon co uk>]

Larry Seltzer wrote:

> > > When the Police is not around, that is something you need.
>
> Some might think of RBLs as vigilantism. There are good things you can
> do and bad things.

I'm not so sure why (some) folks are upset by the idea of "regulating" 
the Internet via "vigilantism".

Reputedly "the Internet's" strongest feature is that it is self-governing 
(or, at least, not governed by any nation state).  Thus, if a large 
enough and influential enough group of Internet users (call them 
"vigilantes" if you wish) force "bad influences" off the Internet then 
that is the Internet working exactly as it is supposed to work.

What's the frikking problem with that?

It has only happened a very tiny number of times and "the Internet" 
itself seems to be large enough and generally to have enough inertia to 
resist "insufficiently large/influential" groupings of (would be) 
"vigilantes" (that being another of its reputed strong and desirable 
features -- that it is self-correcting).

Is that optimal?

Perhaps not, as "resilience" was the primary design goal, that may 
necessarily produce some inefficiency and unnecessary redundancy.


Regards,

Nick FitzGerald


_______________________________________________
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.