Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Should ISPs Be The Little Man's Firewall?

Posted by timothy on from the then-the-spammers-have-won dept.

Anonymous Coward writes "In a paper published today, the point is made that ISPs should filter some ports (e.g. 135) for good. I guess given what everyone sees hitting their various firewalls these days, this may make sense. But wasn't the Internet supposed to be 'open' at one point? Or are we to the point where Internet=Web (and maybe AIM). The author of the paper is operating DShield and I guess has some insight into this issue. He made the same points before on various mailing lists."

1 of 790 comments (clear)

  1. No way by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 0, Redundant

    It is not my responsibility to pay for the fuck ups of MS and those that purchase their products. Adding cruft like this makes the ISP more expensive.

    Those scumbags in Redmond are responsible for this mess... damned if I want my service compromised and made more expensive to cover their ass...

    How bout the courts force them to pay for each of us that bought MS products to recieve a hardware firewall? That would be fair, and it would solve the problem.

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth