DNS: anything goes?

[Nonny Moose]

Not blaming DNS -- just questioning the attitude of the miscreant's ISPs. I
was just surprised that they've let the spammer introduce such bogus records
into the DNS.

I also don't think that leaving the victim to sort out forged DNS records
with the perp is desirable. You'd end up with a lot of hi-jacking of domains
from victims who can't afford an international civil lawsuit.

-N

"Kevin Darcy" <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote in message
news:39345896.CB74F7E3 at daimlerchrysler.com...
> DNS is just a database; as long as the names stay within the syntactic
> guidelines, they are "allowed". Blaming DNS for allowing malicious MX (or
> whatever) records to be advertised is like blaming a piece of paper
because
> someone scrawled something vulgar and/or hateful on it. If some miscreant
> points their MX record at 127.0.0.1, then good mail software should simply
> ignore that MX record as if it never existed, since it is "obviously"
bogus.
> If said miscreant points their MX record at some poor schmuck with which
they
> have no relationship or permission, then that's a matter between the
> perpetrator and the targeted entity: my non-lawyer mind is thinking this
might
> be construable as some form of Conversion (i.e. using someone else's
property
> without their permission but falling short of physical incursion which
would
> otherwise be Trespass) or Nuisance (i.e. the deliberate creation of an
> aberrant condition which degrades other people's peaceful enjoyment and/or
> quality of life). In neither case is it something that "DNS" or the
> BIND software should be trying to enforce, IMO.
>
>
> - Kevin