New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
They do not scan anything. They just partner with big providers like --ro-o-t.
You send 1 mail to any of their domains and they leak you to spamhaus.
Even 1 non-spam mail. And spamhaus knows you. But by big secret
Which is fucking dumb.
Fair point! It'll be interesting how to latter will be handled. It obviously doesn't help, but well, that's sort of the down side of net neutrality (to a certain degree, as always)
Yes and no.
It is the 'not removing it when asked' is the dumb part.
Register a certificate and transparency logs give the domain to the world
This is not effective. It only works if you get ssl. Most domains do not use it, but spamhaus still gets them.
Spamhaus is only for spam. They wont trigger until you send any mail.
As said, they have direct access to stats of big mail providers, so know you immediately if you start sending, even non-spam mails.
The oldest record of this partnership with big mail providers, I see January 2022.
The fingerprints on their "robots" suggest that the software development started at least in late 2020.
Just out of curiosity, hypothetical situation. If I registered a few hundred "bad" domains and pointed them to one of your ip's and spamhaus blacklisted you because of this. How would you clean up your network?
I've never been a customer of yours, we have no relation at all, nothing is running on the ip I pointed the domains to. So, how do you as a provider solve this?
I would assume you would have to show that nothing is hosted on that IP address on your side and what is happening is what you say (someone pointing a domain towards it only). From this thread I'm assuming(?) this can't be done from this side.
Treat that as "bad luck" and work this out with RBL's ASAP without bullshiting and umbrelling everything under "freedom", "can't intervene", "tor", "didn't knew" etc.
If others (with way way more IPs) can keep their shit clean'ish, so one in question also can do that.
No excuses.
You can't, but then we all know that nothing like this happened here, and we're just playing dumb in defending our favorites.
There are certain types of hosts who, under the pretense of free speech, aren't very selective about what they host, and it's expected that this will come back to haunt them from time to time.
We would not show the same courtesy to a less popular host.
Spamhaus didn’t blacklist him because of just the domains, they blacklisted him because of the domains and allowing a retarded domain to be registered, which is a poor choice on his part for allowing the order. I’m sure their decision also factored in the current listings he has and clearly has no desire to resolve. As somebody pointed out, at least one listing dates back 6 months. If you can’t clean your network up, you will earn the reputation for being a shit host and things like this will happen. The client lost the domain because the client did business with him and the reputation he has. Either he doesn’t know how to clean it up/prevent the abuse or simply wants to profit off those types of accounts.
I also don’t and never did, offer anonymous accounts pushing for free-speech and privacy, then turn a blind eye to phishing domains and simply say “oh, there not active, just somebody squatting”, which is something Spamhaus did make a comment on regarding his choice of clientele.
He says in the ticket he’s only gotten 6 emails from them, odd… It looks like he has what, 12~ active listings (1 email per listings). So… how many listings did he have overall in the last 2 years since he’s received his 4.10 space (you do understand 4.10 space is not for hosting right)? He’s received more than 6 emails from them, however, like every other situation, he’s full of nothing more than bullshit. Lie to ARIN, lie to Spamhaus.
False, I know of at least 2 providers that got 4.10 space by giving "hosting" as the justification.
You are assuming they will check. Robots doing the job, are really bad at investigations.
One user here is pointing out that there are a couple hundred questionable domains, as this is exactly what we are talking about, pointing to the providers' IPs and he is also telling the provider to 'clean up his network', based on the DNS registrations.
Which is just the domains..
I received, direct, personal experience, zero emails from them when they listed one of my /24s, which wasn't even on the internet when they listed it because I had already taken care of the issue.
Other blacklist checks services alerted me to the issue, still no email from them until I started the de-listing processes.
This was true in the past, it no longer is. They have branched out into 'bad' hosting too.
No, just shoot him from the roof of a tall nearby building, that is easier and less effort.
Calling 911 would involve some sort of investigation. Might find out there is no handgun at all.
spamhause is part of critical internet, used by virtually everyone, including the white house. previously cloudflare and google stepped in during a conflict to protect spamhause. Safe to say many have interest in continuance of the British/Andorra company protecting virtually the entire internet. One could say they are independent structures, yet with such influence that'd be rather fiction. Having an entity decide what's good or bad on this scale desires proper restructuring by a transparent governing body
I'm not trying to defend anyone, I have very little insight into this providers reputation or business so I will not judge based on that.
I do however seriously dislike when major organisations like this have the power to seize peoples property based on just who they do business with and their "reputation". If it was based on actual reports, spam or abuse, I would not only accept it, I would advocate it. But as I see it they blacklisted it because it was a domain that they think sounds suspicious and it points to a provider that they think has a bad reputation.
I strongly dislike the idea of an internet governed by a few peoples personal opinions. If you act like a dick, break rules or agreements, or simply abuse something in any way, shape or form, I have no problem with people stepping in and stopping you. But when people arbitrarily stops people before they have done anything, just because they think they might do something later on, then I think we have a big problem.
I hope it is not.
If SH did have influence level you claim, SBL's would trigger LEA, but AFAIK the most impact is rejecting emails.
Only on LowEndTalk would you have people trying to justify hosting phishing domains.
I haven't seen any proof that mentioned domains actually host anything and not just point to the IP addresses of incognet
Yeah, all this is just one big misunderstanding!
What I mean is pro-privacy stuff indeed attracts malicious actors. However, incognet seems to handle abuse and takedown phishing as fast as possible. Attackers could have left the DNS A records intact, pointing to IP addresses of incognet. As IP addresses are rotated to new customers there will be no any phishing anymore, however the domain and its' records could last for 1 year.
They could, but I can't find any reference to that in this thread. I would imagine that he would say that if this were the case. As mentioned, we're going to great lengths to find all kinds of excuses.
That's pretty much LET standard. We all know what most likely happened but we're just playing dumb in defending our favorites.
There are certain types of hosts who, under the pretense of free speech, aren't very selective about what they host, and it's expected that this will come back to haunt them from time to time. Funnily enough several of those hosts and their clients have already been posted in this thread - playing dumb again.
We would not show the same courtesy to a less popular host.
I don't have a horse in this race, so I will try to remain silent from now on.
Haven't seen it because it doesn't exists, incog takes down phishing pages and botnets faster than 99% of the providers here.
O, ffs, @kait ...
Like you know anything about 99% of the providers here. You have your personal favorites aligned with your personal views and ideas (let me guess - the "holy defenders of freedom of speech"?) that you're defending blindly.
Your comments have zero value as you're just chiming in based on your personal preference, not actual facts.
Then show some proof someone is using incog for phishing dude. It's that simple. And I am not a freedom of speech supporter.
You're the one making claims based on your standard personal preferences and that's just annoying.
Repeatedly contributing to this thread with a personal agenda of defending your personal favorites without adding any meaningful substance is your standard modus operandi. Like you know a shit what happened in the background.
As you talking about proof, you made several claims in this thread - then show proof that your empty stories of what happened aren't just products of your imagination.
While email is probably one of the hardest things to monitor, you still only have to monitor a single service. As you’ve dealt with abuse on DO, you could probably testify that it’s harder to detect abuse RIGHT AWAY when it could occur on so many levels, no?
Port scanning, illegal content, copyright, email, outgoing ddos, I can’t even name half of it..
Again, obviously handling abuse for email is hard, but you can probably put much more specialized solutions in place, strictly for email, compred to what a small VPS provider could for all of the different ways you can abuse a VPS.