The difference between "illegally monitoring traffic that flows through the servers stored at your site that you maintain for them" and "illegally monitoring traffic that flows through the servers stored at their site but you maintain for them" is almost nil. It's a technicality.
Certainly nothing LIKE enough of a difference to accuse someone of "liar, liar, pants on fire."
When you focus on technicalities, it sounds like you have something to hide. Just sayin'.
By misusing the data, It was now an infiltration. This company did not respect the data they were gathering and had a contract to gather this data.. The infiltration happened years ago when they were first hired and then they executed it by handing the data to unauthorized parties. This is like putting malware on your computer and years later it executes itself and steals your sensitive data. The firm was corrupt from the git go.
Huh. Show me in the DNS request packets where a DNS server can determine the application using the resolver library. If you are collecting user-agent strings and application information, you are doing more than DNS resolution. Say, what if a malicious user with a Yotaphone connects to WIFI in Trump Towers and then surfs to known bad web sites in order to paint a picture of Trump folks colluding with Russia. You think that is possible?
You are totally correct on the technology issues. It pains me when I hear people saying "servers" when DNS logs are created by routers and stored on file servers of some sort (and often not). But as far as this wasn't basic commerce going on (I provide confidential data to you, you give me a better job when you win), for heaven's sake, don't be naïve.
You are totally correct on the technology issues. It pains me when I hear people saying "servers" when DNS logs are created by routers and stored on file servers of some sort (and often not). But as far as this wasn't basic commerce going on (I provide confidential data to you, you give me a better job when you win), for heaven's sake, don't be naïve.
The difference between "illegally monitoring traffic that flows through the servers stored at your site that you maintain for them" and "illegally monitoring traffic that flows through the servers stored at their site but you maintain for them" is almost nil. It's a technicality.
Certainly nothing LIKE enough of a difference to accuse someone of "liar, liar, pants on fire."
When you focus on technicalities, it sounds like you have something to hide. Just sayin'.
By misusing the data, It was now an infiltration. This company did not respect the data they were gathering and had a contract to gather this data.. The infiltration happened years ago when they were first hired and then they executed it by handing the data to unauthorized parties. This is like putting malware on your computer and years later it executes itself and steals your sensitive data. The firm was corrupt from the git go.
We're making a big assumption here, aren't we, that Trump's companies used Neustar's DNS.
And if they did, everyone on the planet should immediately stop using Neustar. Privacy? What's that?
Huh. Show me in the DNS request packets where a DNS server can determine the application using the resolver library. If you are collecting user-agent strings and application information, you are doing more than DNS resolution. Say, what if a malicious user with a Yotaphone connects to WIFI in Trump Towers and then surfs to known bad web sites in order to paint a picture of Trump folks colluding with Russia. You think that is possible?
You are totally correct on the technology issues. It pains me when I hear people saying "servers" when DNS logs are created by routers and stored on file servers of some sort (and often not). But as far as this wasn't basic commerce going on (I provide confidential data to you, you give me a better job when you win), for heaven's sake, don't be naïve.
You are totally correct on the technology issues. It pains me when I hear people saying "servers" when DNS logs are created by routers and stored on file servers of some sort (and often not). But as far as this wasn't basic commerce going on (I provide confidential data to you, you give me a better job when you win), for heaven's sake, don't be naïve.