nate at refried.org (nate at refried.org) wrote:
> > http://www.informationwave.net/news/20020819riaa.php
> 
> Saw it too.  I would forward this to AT&T, bit I'm pretty certain they
> don't have the skills to do the same. ;)

Um.  Did you look at the IP and hostnames of the name servers
riaa.{org,net,com} are using?

   DBRU.BR.NS.ELS-GMS.ATT.NET   199.191.128.106
   DMTU.MT.NS.ELS-GMS.ATT.NET   12.127.16.70

I have a feeling AT&Greed wouldn't do much.

Bob wrote:
> What's the RIAA's block?

Not sure.  There's a way to look up the owner of blocks, but I'm not
sure what it is any more.

> What prevents them from getting another block?

Nothing.

> What prevents them from setting up colo "DoS" boxes all over the place?

Nothing.  The article and effort alone is enough to get newsworthy
print.  It's a legitimate stance against corporate hacking and direct
DoS, regardless how pointedly unrealistic it might be.

-- 
Chad Walstrom <chewie at wookimus.net>                 | a.k.a. ^chewie
http://www.wookimus.net/                            | s.k.a. gunnarr