McColo Takedown, Vigilantes Or Neighborhood Watch?

CWmike writes "Few tears were shed when alleged spam and malware purveyor McColo was suddenly taken offline last Tuesday by its upstream service providers. But behind the scenes of the McColo case and another recent takedown of Intercage, a ferocious struggle is taking place between the purveyors of Web-based malware and loosely aligned but highly committed groups of security researchers who are out to neutralize them. Backers claim that the effort to shut down miscreant ISPs is needed because of the inability of law enforcement agencies to deal with a problem that is global in nature. But some question whether there is a hint of vigilantism behind the takedowns — even as they acknowledge that there may not be any other viable options for dealing with the problem at this point."

Comments

No authorites needed to enforce a TOS agreement

[mpascal]

If the upstream providers had a service agreement that disallowed the use of their network for illegal activities, they can pull the plug any time.

Re:The entire colo?

[John Hasler]

> I host a few web servers at a colo. I have no idea what my neighbors are serving up. If
> my sites were shut down without notice I'd be pretty unhappy.

Well, then you would sue the colo operator, wouldn't you? They are the ones who contracted to provide you with service. Would you blame the power company if it shut down your colo operator for breaching his contract with it by not paying his bill? Then why blame your colo operator's upstream provider for shutting him down for breaching his contract with them?