<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Service providers to patrol internet ?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cryptocrats.com/security/service-providers-to-patrol-internet/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cryptocrats.com/security/service-providers-to-patrol-internet/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:49:43 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mouse</title>
		<link>http://cryptocrats.com/security/service-providers-to-patrol-internet/comment-page-1/#comment-71</link>
		<dc:creator>Mouse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 17:18:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cryptocrats.com/2008/06/18/service-providers-to-patrol-internet/#comment-71</guid>
		<description>There are indeed end user privacy issues (e.g. people don&#039;t seem to like if police would search every visitor of their home). In addition, there are questions of (a) competency  - do you really trust your half-clued ISP to do better job than you can in DETECTING and filtering out your inbound malicious traffic AND leaving alone what you need to see, and (b) ability - even if ISP&#039;s weren&#039;t half-clued, how likely is it for them to understand traffic peculiarities of every individual customer (private and corporate) to the point of being able to cull only the &quot;bad&quot; packets? Also, how is this filtering going to deal with SSL-protected traffic (and IPsec, etc)?  Considering ever-increasing sophistication of the attacks and increasing tendency for attackers to try &quot;flying under the radar&quot; - I personally see little chance for an ISP to do something useful here. 

I understand the desire of ISP&#039;s to play a role  bigger than &quot;dumb pipe&quot; and get a bigger cut of the Internet money pie - but this lead ball doesn&#039;t seem to fly well.

Now snooping on &quot;normal&quot; legitimate customers and their traffic - that&#039;s totally possible, but it&#039;s a different topic altogether.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are indeed end user privacy issues (e.g. people don&#8217;t seem to like if police would search every visitor of their home). In addition, there are questions of (a) competency  &#8211; do you really trust your half-clued ISP to do better job than you can in DETECTING and filtering out your inbound malicious traffic AND leaving alone what you need to see, and (b) ability &#8211; even if ISP&#8217;s weren&#8217;t half-clued, how likely is it for them to understand traffic peculiarities of every individual customer (private and corporate) to the point of being able to cull only the &#8220;bad&#8221; packets? Also, how is this filtering going to deal with SSL-protected traffic (and IPsec, etc)?  Considering ever-increasing sophistication of the attacks and increasing tendency for attackers to try &#8220;flying under the radar&#8221; &#8211; I personally see little chance for an ISP to do something useful here. </p>
<p>I understand the desire of ISP&#8217;s to play a role  bigger than &#8220;dumb pipe&#8221; and get a bigger cut of the Internet money pie &#8211; but this lead ball doesn&#8217;t seem to fly well.</p>
<p>Now snooping on &#8220;normal&#8221; legitimate customers and their traffic &#8211; that&#8217;s totally possible, but it&#8217;s a different topic altogether.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
