|
||||||||
* Quoting Alex Neuman van der Hans (alex at nkpanama dot com): > Rolf Kutz wrote: > >How does using smtps or vpn reduce abuse, if I > >would be sending mail over my ISPs smtpd anyway? > >And pointing to webmail doesn't really help > >either. The question is whether you want to > >offer _Internet_access or _web_access? Why not block > >everything but Port 80? Abuse can be done with > >ftp, ssh or netcat. > > > > > Because your ISP would then block you for abuse, and there would be an That would be my (the customers) problem, not the hotels. > audit trail. People are free to offer services as they please, just as > clients are free to purchase/use said services *if* they choose to. > That's one of the uses of the captive portal page: to explain to your > users what is or is not allowed on *your* network, which is *yours*, and > not *theirs*. They are your *guests* and they *should* behave as such. They might be *customers* who pay for the service > That's the beauty of it. You *choose* to go wherever you want to go or > not depending on whether or not they give the service you want to receive. > > In some countries there is a "due diligence" clause that requires > internet café operators, libraries and such, in order to get a business > license and/or permit, to install filters that will block any webpages > that explictly declare they are for adults only if minors are allowed > entrance and/or provide some basic protection. They won't fine you if a Those filters often "protect" people from websites that could educate them about health, gender or racial discrimination, the pros and cons of web filters and many more. > "closing specific ports" method of firewalling. You will find a lot of > people agree that it's more practical to only open your firewall to > traffic you actually *want* and *need* and not the other way around. I agree with the later, but if you offer a service like Internet access you can hardly know what traffic you need. That's one thing stateful firewalling is for. > Oh, and by the way, the "million flies can't be wrong" argument is > similar to the "straw man" logical fallacy; it doesn't really refute the It was a replication to your own "straw man". Mind if I quote you again: | This isn't as crazy as it sounds. I've set up several | hotels/resorts/golf clubs like this, and I've been to quite a few here | and all over the world that do the same thing. > Have a great day... U2, Rolf |