lolwhat
We Are Toast
Premium
join:2001-06-11
USSA
 ·AT&T Midwest
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
|  reply to Chuck D
Re: Insight AUP Violation
What about mail servers? Not an open relay, though!!! If I did start running a mail server, I would make damn sure to secure it. It'd be low traffic, as well; I don't get much e-mail at all, I almost never get spam, and I'd like to get admin practice at some point.
--
Yeah, well, at least your name isn't Michael Bolton.
Join Team Helix! |
|
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| reply to SineSwiper
They can knock all day lol. But unless they use something other than a scanner. They won't get in. I've had many an @HOME tech tell me they couldn't ping me in the past. I've seen the old @HOME Security scans. I'm sure the ISP has something similar to this. If not even more advanced by now. But a good firewall would have stopped a few of the above issues. In my opinion only.
--
*IGGYZ* *TeamZ* |
|
SineSwiper
join:2002-04-04
Louisville, KY
| reply to Busted
I'm not saying that I agree with it, either. I want 384 or 512 kbps, too, but honestly, the cable companies are starting to get reemed for the amount of bandwidth being used by customers, even though they are capped, and it's hurting them. (Not that I have any respect for monopolizing cable companies that choke as much money out of you as they can, but...)
When you compare a T1 line that pumps half of the b/w as your cable connection, and the price of at least $700/mo on a T1, I think you're getting a good deal, and they have every right to try to restrict what you run on it.
BTW, a good port scanner can scan ports IP-by-IP-per-port instead of port-by-port-per-IP. This kind of port scanning can fool firewalls. And I know they have this type of thing, because I've seen it on my firewall logs. |
|
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| reply to SineSwiper
»www.optonline.net/Cservice/Artic···,00.html I could be wrong. But from a quick read of OOL TOS it looks as if it is ok to run them there. Or at least it stated you could run an IRC server. Just from a quick read. Also DSL providers aren't as hard on customers about this type of thing. But if your going to ban ftp you should ban p2p. It's basically the same thing. Honestly they could boot me for using Paltalk or other chat software. Considering it & others. Have file sharing capability. And file share back & forth. Would seem to be a server to me. If I serve a file to someone else. Guess I shouldn't add file attachments to email anymore either. They might claim I'm running a server. Since I sent a file to a friend. P.S. = A firewall solves a good amount of the bs. If there scanning for open ports.
--
*IGGYZ*
*TeamZ*
[text was edited by author 2002-06-03 21:11:47]
[text was edited by author 2002-06-03 21:12:52] |
|
SineSwiper
join:2002-04-04
Louisville, KY
| reply to frankenfeet
said by frankenfeet:
I really don't understand how they can shut you down for running a server. We pay for the up and download. Obviously your can't use any more bandwidth than you pay for. If you pay for 3000/128 than you should be able to use it, 24/7 if you want. Maybe I'm too simple minded for this though.
Whether you agree with it or not, it does appear in their AUP/TOS thingy. Personally, I'd like to give everybody a chalenge: Give me a cable ISP that doesn't give you any restrictions on servers or what you do with your bandwidth, and I'll eat my keyboard. |
|
SineSwiper
join:2002-04-04
Louisville, KY
| reply to Busted
You know, some of these are probably Win2k servers, with people who don't know how to shut off their services. Now, I think MS shouldn't have these on by default, but if you're pirating Win2K Enterprise SERVER, it's implied that you're running a SERVER, so watch what you're doing with that machine and with what ports you have open.
I'm sure they're pissed at all of the blank IIS pages floating around that are passing CodeRed and Nimda viruses all over the net. Open-relay SMTP servers are probably another issue. Linux boxes also come with a lot of open ports, depending on the distro you're using.
I really don't think file-sharing services are an issue. That's the whole point of a HSD connection  |
|
frankenfeet
Premium
join:2001-10-14
Smiths Grove, KY
·Insight VOIP
 ·Insight Communicat..
| reply to Busted
I really don't understand how they can shut you down for running a server. We pay for the up and download. Obviously your can't use any more bandwidth than you pay for. If you pay for 3000/128 than you should be able to use it, 24/7 if you want. Maybe I'm too simple minded for this though.
--
"Every new beginning comes from some other beginnings end." |
|
Engineer_TA
join:2001-08-26
Lexington, KY
clubs:
·Insight Communicat..
| reply to Busted
Here's a small story...
About two weeks ago, my wife called me (I was on a business trip) and stated that the Internet was down....
Two days later, I called Insightbb and the tech said something was strange and he would call me back...
A few minutes later, a senior tech called me back and stated that I was running 4 servers. I said "HUH!" as I'm not running anything! I thought and then asked what ports...21, 80 and two others (don't remember which ones)....I asked if it could be my router, he said NO!
Well, after digging around, I discovered that it was indeed my router responding with a login prompt on those ports. I read around and fixed it, but the gripe I have is that I received NO notification what-so-ever...just a shutoff. On top of that, I lost 3 days worth of e-mail as the server didn't hold them when my service was shut off!
I haven't called back yet and explained...not sure if it's worth the bother...but it does make me a little angry..
Ok...enough of that....just thought I would share! |
|
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY
| reply to deathmuppet
said by deathmuppet:
how can they justify telling us what we're allowed to do with that tiny bit of bandwidth?
They don't have to. They set the rules and you abide by them. If not, then you might have to suffer the consequences.
--
Join DSLR's new Strategy Gaming Clan!
Join Team Discovery and find the cure for cancer! |
|
deathmuppet
@insightBB.com | reply to Busted
if they're already restricting our upload, how can they justify telling us what we're allowed to do with that tiny bit of bandwidth? we're allowed 128kbps of upload, we're just not allowed to use it. |
|
XuhQshinR
join:2001-09-18
Bradenton, FL
|  reply to Busted
Reply to the original post.
I also received this AUP Violation notice May 20th 2000.
As of June 3rd I will also be an employee with Insight. I called and had them run a trace on what was leading them to believe that a server was running. As someone mentioned in another reply to this post Insightbb was doing port scans and it turns out that a port for FTP was open. I was not running an FTP server. However my router was set with the FTP port open.
Certain open ports will show a possibility that a server exists.
The bottom line here is that you should do a port scan yourself and see what is open. That way you can shut these open ports that are not in use. Port scans can be very beneficial to your own protection from "Evil Doers" (My President taught me that) They can even tell you if File and Print sharing is on (dangerous for cable users).
The tech support people at Insight are fairly busy but are willing to help you if you can not find what ports are causing the server detection during a port scan.
They don't want to ban anyone but full time servers will definitely get you the boot. Playing online games is ok but do not leave the thing up while you sleep, work, go to school etc...
Hope this answers a little bit of your question of concern on the AUP Violation notice you received. |
|
Laggy
join:2002-05-07
Indianapolis, IN | reply to hockeyfun1$
pretty much the same response I got from my email to them |
|
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY
| reply to Chuck D
Welcome to DSLR! You should register! They could sure use more people stopping by who work for the ISPs so it would be great to have you.
That's good to hear, it is pretty much like all the other ISPs in terms of what can and can't be ran.
--
Join DSLR's new Strategy Gaming Clan!
Join Team Discovery and find the cure for cancer! |
|
Chuck D
@insightBB.com
| reply to Busted
Here is the deal guys.
Games are fine.
Game servers are fine for short periods of time. (Dont run it 24-7)
Ftp's are a no no
Web servers are a no-no
Kazza and other P2P apps are ok.
Pc anywhere type utils are fine.
Just dont run 24-7 "dedicated servers for warez, pr0n, etc and you will be fine.
I work there ok. |
|
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| reply to hockeyfun1$
Well I've said this before. There are many providers. Still providing higher upload with no issues. And for around the same price. Or exact price we all currently pay. InsightBB is one of them. Yes I said InsightBB. And not just there users on RoadRunner. With that said. People use upload more than they realize. But I'll spare going through all that again. Also if you read this post = »Where is MY 256? ATTBI is raising caps for some users. If this was going to cause such an issue. Why would they do it? As for provider cost. There bandwidth cost are a lot lower than they try & get us to believe. I've posted on this before. There main cost are development cost. And paying for the mostly useless tech support. Thank Goodness support is getting better in my area. With cable there are technical reasons you can't have 3000/3000. But there is nothing to stop them. From running at 256 or higher. Even without tiered service upgrades. Other providers do this. With no issue. The minimum standard for upload should at the least be 256kpbs. And several companies with broadband applications in the works. Would like that to be even higher. But your cable companies have no interest in stream video over the net. They aren't in the business. And it would hurt there cable interest. This is 1 of the many reasons we get stuck with low upload. Servers aren't the reason. And I've stated exactly why before. But again I'll spare the re hash.
--
*IGGYZ* *TeamZ* |
|
Anon | reply to hockeyfun1$
256 and 350 wouldn't be going overboard.. :P Most providers carry more bandwidth than they need for future growth. Nobody knows if 50% more users will want cable, or if a dsl company will go out of business and the dsl market desimates for that community. Yeah, each community and provider is different, but all providors have to carry more incase of future growth.. I say up the cap for now, then they can always lower the cap to save money if the company is going through some bad times, or needs more bandwidth. Only getting 110kbps of your 128kbps might happen for different reasons too, maybe latency? heheh |
|
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY
| said by rutoro:
I'm sure they have more than enough upstream to give at least a 256 or 350 cap. No company has that much of a gob of downstream and such a meager amount of upstream..
Actually, every company is different. Also think. If an ISP is going to give a 128 kbps cap to everyone, what's the point of having 300 kbps available to the people if they aren't going to get to use it? It just costs extra money for the provider. With my provider in this area I get around 110 kbps of the 128 kbps. No point on even having an upload cap. The bandwidth for the upload isn't there. It just would cost the provider extra money. People use download more than the upload, that's why it's higher. Servers aren't allowed to be ran on your ISP, so they don't concentrate on the upload as much. People use the download way more if they aren't running servers. Then they give you the rest of the upload for what you might need it for without going overboard because there will be the people taking advantage of a higher upload.
--
Join DSLR's new Strategy Gaming Clan!
Join Team Discovery and find the cure for cancer!
[text was edited by author 2002-05-25 23:22:32] |
|
Anon | reply to hockeyfun1$
I go with Iggy's point -- Some people don't WANT broadband with training wheels. I'm sure they have more than enough upstream to give at least a 256 or 350 cap. No company has that much of a gob of downstream and such a meager amount of upstream.. :P Besides -- we all know attbi powers insightbb. I've seen most/a lot of attbi users have 350 upload... And if they were having such trouble with connectivity with higher caps, why not have RR come in and do the job instead? Insight@RR has proven to be pretty good as I've seen.. |
|
lolwhat
We Are Toast
Premium
join:2001-06-11
USSA
·AT&T Midwest
·Future Nine Corpor..
| reply to hockeyfun1$
said by hockeyfun1:
if it's a business they should have bought the business account
InsightBB doesn't offer business access - at least, not yet. Point taken, though; that company should get DSL or a T-something. Of course, they're in Ameritech territory, which only recently started Pronto back up again in Illinois, so who knows when they could get DSL...
--
Yeah, well, at least your name isn't Michael Bolton.
Join Team Helix! |
|
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY
| Yeah, because Insight plans on everyone having that as an upload and they don't have as much upload and download available as let's say a company who has caps of 5000/512.
To the post above; if it's a business they should have bought the business account.
--
Join DSLR's new Strategy Gaming Clan!
Join Team Discovery and find the cure for cancer! |
|
