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.
100TB GVH? You mean 1.66TB
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
@GreenValueHost I do not have to assume. It is pretty evident that offering this product is a stupid decision yet you are still trying to defend it. Step off your soap box, apologize, remove the product and move on. Period.
The fact you have become good at attracting abusers should say a lot for your business and its current state. I highly doubt many other providers here with their products have this much daily churn because of abuse. You seem to attract that type of attention with your ridiculous offers.
To be fair, you did not stipulate a reason in your previous comment, you just suggested you were terminating a lot of abusers, and how are we to know the reasons you are using? The best we can do is take your word for it, which honestly isn't worth very much at this point.
Cheers!
So you provided @shovenose with evidence for "ddossing"?
He admitted to DoSing so no evidence is needed. ColoCrossing has the abuse report.
He didn't admit to DoSing anyone. You terminated him for DoS before you gave him a chance to explain himself.
It's obvious you only terminated him because he was likely to actually use your ridiculously high and unrealistic 100TB bandwidth.
No, he admitted he was downloading the speedtest file every 2 minutes. If I set up a Pingdom monitor to monitor your website at once every 2 minutes, is that a DOS?
I can hardly believe CC would make such a silly mistake and just forward the report without looking into any details. However I found it is even more silly that a host is shutting their own client down for such an "abuse". LOL
ColoCrossing nullrouted his IP and gave us an abuse notice claiming that it was a DoS. We took action. That's all there is to say here really. I don't really want to argue this anymore ..
JB only a couple of pages back suggested himself that it was not likely enough that they would be interested/concerned about it to nullroute. So why don't you post the abuse report from them and that will stop everyone going on..
Clueless.
+1
Honestly it is fine if the abuse notice doesn't exist, we just need to get the correct story on what actually happened. I have cancelled and refunded services that were abusive in nature on a shared port. However I didn't sit there and blame upstream providers and say my hands are tied. I communicated with the client and gave them a chance to understand what they were doing and how it was affecting the shared resources. Then I give them a chance to change their behavior and actually use their VPS. It works really well when you just open up a dialogue. Then again I normally refund in good faith, if a resolution can not be agreed on.
@jbiloh, is it true that Colocrossing will nullroute an IP just because someone is downloading a speed test file once every 2 minutes and the host of the that file complains about it?
Here is an idea, I just got this email from OneProvider:
http://oneprovider.com/dedicated-servers/amsterdam-netherlands
One of the lines I got is:
So what if I host a file on this server and someone who is with GVH run a wget once every minute to download the file? I will not send any DOS complain, LOL...
CC gave us an abuse notification in a template. Jbiloh stated that the template they used is used when they receive a report from a 3rd party. CC did not provide a copy of the abuse report they received, however asked us to take action. We were informed that the IP was nullrouted.
Then how is a real DoS attack working based on your knowledge?
i mean.. throwing in a random word like "clueless" is pretty easy, it doesn't backup anything.
I've explained multiple times how it does work (out of experience) and here you are saying it doesn't work like that, thats fine but then atleast explain HOW it works according to your knowledge.
If you cannot back it up then what you said has no value at all.
If that monitor denies or severely impairs service, yes. Jesus christ.
You know what, im done with LET for now, this is just annoying.
So if I build a house on thin air and you touch it and it collapses, you are actually going to pay my damage for destroying the house?
I think there is something in law that is called "reasonable basis", if you drive a tank into my house and crashes it, then obviously you need to pay for the damage. However I think pulling a file once every 2 minutes is pretty reasonable considering Hostdime's speedtest file probably gets pulled at this frequency, just not from a single IP.
can we please see a copy of this abuse report ?
that way we can put this all to rest.
@shovenose
is it OK if GVH shares this notice with us ? please reply ASAP.
This thread has definitely gotten out of hand..
Can we see this "Abuse" notice to clarify it?
Also why offer bandwidth like that with no safeguard in place i.e acceptable use policy, Clearly this is a misuse of resources, However offering this plan with no safeguards is just stupid and asking for issues like this to araise, Also to be honest this has nothing to do with CC, In fact I doubt they would even send you a notice because a client is using bandwidth?
So conclusion, The OP is wrong for major misusing bandwidth/resources which wouldn't be really classed as a Denial of Service as there was no attempt to make a machine or network resource unavailable to its intended users, Although crossing the line someones speedtest file. However it's obviously a really stupid thing to do, Trying to use all of a resource because you have them is just sad.
But also the blame is shared upon the host for not setting strict guild lines and offering such a ridiculous offer which they are unable to provide. Also ColoCrossing shouldn't really have anything to do with one of your VPS customers using bandwidth...
All in all if the Host didn't offer such a plan(Without Restrictions) the issue wouldn't of occurred?
LOL
My thoughts exactly! :-D
ColoCrossing nulled the IP. We of course have no access to control nullroutes.
We were sent an abuse notification. jbiloh stated that the template they used for the abuse notification is used when they receive a report from a 3rd party. We were not provided with that report, however we were asked to take action.
What did you guys want us to do? His IP was nullrouted.
I personally have no idea (or care) what he was doing or if it caused a problem. I'm simply trying to clear up the apparent confusion and chaos stringing together the words "denial" "of" and "service" is causing in this thread.
Whether you mean to or not, if you are denying someone service, then you are denying them service. I don't know why this is so hard to understand?
This has nothing to do with laws, how many hosts are causing the problem, why its happening or how many tanks you are driving into homes.
I still don't understand what you guys are expecting from us, given what I said above? What do you want us to do? Pull an abuse notice from nowhere? We don't have it. We were told that shovenose's IP was nullrouted and to take action or face consequences. I honestly do not know what we could have done otherwise.
I think people want you to stop offering 100TB / month for $5. 10TB is plenty
So you terminated a customers account because another company told you to? And you have no physical or digital proof to justify this action?
Pure idiocy, I'm so glad I'm not with you guys.
Please don't twist words around. shovenose, whom we terminated, ADMITTED to the action that he was terminated for. The action that he was terminated for is considered, by definition, a DoS attack, therefore he was justly terminated. AND he admitted to the action on his own, which itself IS proof.
I don't think any provider here would argue with their datacenter after being told "Take action on this or face consequences" .. ?
Mind reader