nate at refried.org (nate at refried.org) wrote: > > http://www.informationwave.net/news/20020819riaa.php > > Saw it too. I would forward this to AT&T, bit I'm pretty certain they > don't have the skills to do the same. ;) Um. Did you look at the IP and hostnames of the name servers riaa.{org,net,com} are using? DBRU.BR.NS.ELS-GMS.ATT.NET 199.191.128.106 DMTU.MT.NS.ELS-GMS.ATT.NET 12.127.16.70 I have a feeling AT&Greed wouldn't do much. Bob wrote: > What's the RIAA's block? Not sure. There's a way to look up the owner of blocks, but I'm not sure what it is any more. > What prevents them from getting another block? Nothing. > What prevents them from setting up colo "DoS" boxes all over the place? Nothing. The article and effort alone is enough to get newsworthy print. It's a legitimate stance against corporate hacking and direct DoS, regardless how pointedly unrealistic it might be. -- Chad Walstrom <chewie at wookimus.net> | a.k.a. ^chewie http://www.wookimus.net/ | s.k.a. gunnarr