Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678
Results 176 to 186 of 186
  1. #176
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    56
    @BurstNET:

    I have been using your service for more than 6 years now. I understand that you had to take the server offline immediately but why didn't you do the following:

    - Suspend the server immediately.
    - Give the client SSH access but keep everything else blocked via firewall (maybe limiting access to his IP range).
    - After client deletes the links bring the server back online but cancel regularly with 14 days due notice.

    Perfect solution for you. Happy FBI, slightly pissed of yet not too angry customer and nobody could acuse you of anything here.
      0 Not allowed!

  2. #177
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Under The Floor Tiles
    Posts
    566
    Quote Originally Posted by hostinginsiders View Post
    Perfect solution for you. Happy FBI, slightly pissed of yet not too angry customer and nobody could acuse you of anything here.
    From a technical standpoint it would be impossible for Burst to limit access only to the customer's IP, since they don't know where he is or what IP he would access it from.

    Additionally, it's not enough to just cut off HTTP access. Somebody might access it via FTP or SSH and get the instructions that way.

    And it seems that even though Burst has posted a full and complete explanation with all their reasoning and logical steps documented, people are still failing to read that and keep asking the same questions over and over. I have a strange feeling that a lot of people in this thread started out feeling sorry for the client, but now are just out to get BurstNET for whatever they can.

    Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
    "When a man begins to doubt himself, he does something incredibly stupid and thereby is reassured."
    ::http://www.dustytech.net/:: Personal Website
      0 Not allowed!

  3. #178
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by danclough View Post
    From a technical standpoint it would be impossible for Burst to limit access only to the customer's IP, since they don't know where he is or what IP he would access it from.
    How about... BurstNET providing the backup on another IP?

    Quote Originally Posted by danclough View Post
    Additionally, it's not enough to just cut off HTTP access. Somebody might access it via FTP or SSH and get the instructions that way.
    Nice to see you're exploring all possibilities, but that's abit far fetched for a blog site.

    Quote Originally Posted by danclough View Post
    And it seems that even though Burst has posted a full and complete explanation with all their reasoning and logical steps documented, people are still failing to read that and keep asking the same questions over and over. I have a strange feeling that a lot of people in this thread started out feeling sorry for the client, but now are just out to get BurstNET for whatever they can.
    It would help if BurstNET didn't have a poor reputation in the first place.
    Granted, they are a budget provider (which they often bring up as justification for their attitudes).

    So here's a newsflash: you get what you pay for (and vice versa).
    Seems like there's a good number of people who don't like BurstNET's handling of customers and issues, and the solution is simple: avoid them.
    For the rest, they can settle with BurstNET till they can afford better or face the brunt of BurstNET's attitudes.
      0 Not allowed!

  4. #179
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Huntersville, NC
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by Host Ultra View Post

    The FBI requested that you not inform the customer, that seems pretty clear that they just wanted the information, not to disrupt the customers activity.
    Correct, they did not ask us. We admitted a mistake was made. This was the first time we had seen this particular request. It was identified incorrectly in our system and we communicated it incorrectly to blogetery.com. We've updated our policy and procedures and We've apologized for the mistake. However, given the clients documented history of violating our TOS/AUP, and the seriousness of information contained in the request we choose to terminate.

    At the very least, had Blogetery.com not been previously suspended we would have simply suspended him this time.
    Joe Marr
    BurstNet Technologies, Inc.
      0 Not allowed!

  5. #180
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Huntersville, NC
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave - Just199 View Post
    Burst went overboard on this and reacted very poorly based on this guy being a "bad customer". What a piss poor attitude, and how seemingly appropriate coming from Burst. Issues like this should be responded to of their own accord, in fact I think that you opened yourself to potential harm by taking action that alerted the user to the FBI investigation while they were in the evidence gathering stage. I would think that something like this could be construed as impeding an ongoing investigation.
    You honestly don't think we might have checked with them before releasing a statement or speaking with the media?
    Joe Marr
    BurstNet Technologies, Inc.
      0 Not allowed!

  6. #181
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by danclough View Post
    Additionally, it's not enough to just cut off HTTP access. Somebody might access it via FTP or SSH and get the instructions that way.
    Unless new information has surfaced, what was posted to the server was a link - not the actual information. Burst's official statement specifically says "link."
    Andrew Borntreger
    Champion of Cinematic Disasters
    The Bad Movie Website
    www.badmovies.org
      0 Not allowed!

  7. #182
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Huntersville, NC
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by mariushm View Post
    My reasoning would be this.

    Did FBI request that an action take place within a very short time frame (let's say 24 hours) or it was up to you to remove it in reasonable time?

    Checking those URLs, are those blog posts OLD? If they're several days old it would be obvious that if those messages were intended to reach someone then they probably already reached that person so it's no urgency.

    Check the client history, does he reply relatively fast to emails or not, does he have history of not replying in short time.

    If FBI requests immediat action, less than 24 hours, I'd remove the network cable from the server or firewall it, notify the client of this and connect KVMoIP to sort it out (well, maybe only if client had history of replying fast to emails and collaborating well).

    If no immediate action is required, then if client is usually responsive I would email him explaining the situation and give him 12-24 hours to reply and fix the issue.
    If client not responsive, I would try to give him a call and at the same time email his with request to answer in 4-8 hours or his server would be disconnected from the net.

    If I'd choose to no longer keep him as client, I would firewall the server and request from him one IP that would be allowed to connect to the server so that he can transfer his data within 1-3 days.

    I believe none of these actions were forbidden by FBI based on what I've read in this thread.
    Your points are valid and acceptable.

    This user (he can claim what he wants, we have email and ticket system logs) had a history of not responding withing 24 hours. His last abuse resulted in him being suspended for over 3 days, add the 48 hours we give before suspension, and thats over 5 days between notfication and his action. With his history, we chose to terminate.
    Joe Marr
    BurstNet Technologies, Inc.
      0 Not allowed!

  8. #183
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,036
    Okay. Let's review this again (for hopefully the last time) and state the facts (and leave out all the conspiracy jibber-jabber):


    • Blogetery.com has a history of DMCA complaints and his last issue left him down for 4 days due to his camping/snowboarding (depending on if he was telling us or the media).
    • We receive a letter from the FBI asking for information related to Terrorist threats (hit-list) and bomb-making
    • We reviewed the history of the server, and coupled with the egregious extent of the present violation of our TOS, and coupled with the history of the server, we decided to pull the server. We left blogetery.com's owners other servers online and working. NOTE: At this point we were unaware that this was a free blogging server, nor were we aware of how many users there are/were. We still do not have proof of that, by the way, as even with all this media attention, there seems to be only three people claiming to be bloggers on Blogetery.com and having any issues with what has transpired.
    • When Blogetery.com contacted us, an employee misunderstood the full history outlined above and did tell them that the server was shut down by Law Enforcement Officials. This was incorrect and admitted to already. At no point during his conversations with us did Blogetery.com allude to THOUSANDS of customers being affected.
    • As outlined by our CTO, we are working on getting Blogetery.com's owner his data back, but we are researching all legal ramifications before doing so (In response to Host Ultra's question about what copyrighted material: There may be more than has been found, and we need to make sure legally we are not aiding and abetting distribution of any copyrighted material)

    Again, and finally, we chose to take down the server, per our TOS. We do not like abusive servers in our data centers, take a hard stand on abusers, and handled this server no differently than we have the hundreds of servers we've pulled before or the hundreds we will pull in the future. Our AUP and TOS are clearly defined and every customer MUST agree to them before getting any service with us.

    If anyone has an issue with how we handle our abuse, we ask you to read our AUP and TOS before signing up with us.
    Last edited by BurstNET_CSM; 07-22-2010 at 01:52 PM. Reason: typos
      0 Not allowed!

  9. #184
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by BurstNET_CSM View Post
    Again, and finally, we chose to take down the server, per our TOS. We do not like abusive servers in our data centers, take a hard stand on abusers, and handled this server no differently than we have the hundreds of servers we've pulled before or the hundreds we will pull in the future. Our AUP and TOS are clearly defined and every customer MUST agree to them before getting any service with us
    In this specific case where the FBI and Al Quaeda are involved I can not blame you for your decision. But in general I think it is very important to make a difference between long term reseller customers and a quick fraudster who pays you with a stolen credit card. In the second case you can cancel the server right away. But in the first case I think the preferable method is a suspension, giving the customer a chance to resolve the issue. Now if the client has a history of abuse and you decide you no longer want to host them bring the server back online once they resolve it but send them a regular cancellation with 14 days due notice so they can move away nicely. People may complain about this but just cancelling the service without prior warning is always going to backfire and is simply unnecessary. A regular cancellation with 14 days due notice and you will be fine. Trust me it's the best and safest solution for everyone involved. Just insisting on your TOS is one thing but what is in your best interest is another thing (maybe not in this specific case though).
      0 Not allowed!

  10. #185
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,036
    Quote Originally Posted by hostinginsiders View Post
    In this specific case where the FBI and Al Quaeda are involved I can not blame you for your decision. But in general I think it is very important to make a difference between long term reseller customers and a quick fraudster who pays you with a stolen credit card. In the second case you can cancel the server right away. But in the first case I think the preferable method is a suspension, giving the customer a chance to resolve the issue. Now if the client has a history of abuse and you decide you no longer want to host them bring the server back online once they resolve it but send them a regular cancellation with 14 days due notice so they can move away nicely. People may complain about this but just cancelling the service without prior warning is always going to backfire and is simply unnecessary. A regular cancellation with 14 days due notice and you will be fine. Trust me it's the best and safest solution for everyone involved.
    I thank you for your input. We have a a large reseller base, and work with them and our direct sales with the same professional demeanor and attention. This server was canceled due to its history and the nature of the abuses.
      0 Not allowed!

  11. #186
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    WebHostingTalk
    Posts
    8,901
    I think this horse has been pretty well beaten.

    </thread>
    I support the Human Rights Campaign!
    Moving to the Tampa, Florida area? Check out life in the suburbs in Trinity, Florida.
      0 Not allowed!

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678

Similar Threads

  1. Burstnet review - Burstnet / nocster experience
    By mdshah in forum Dedicated Server
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 05-06-2008, 12:41 PM
  2. BurstNET - Anyone Else had a problem? (NEVER GO WITH BurstNET!!!!!)
    By CustomHosting.org in forum Dedicated Server
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-14-2005, 10:23 AM
  3. BurstNET Slow Setup Time/BurstNET Slow Support Times
    By garmaknoc in forum Dedicated Server
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 08-11-2003, 12:57 PM
  4. BurstNet.cheat BurstNet.Carelessness BurstNet.presumption
    By Burst Lover in forum Dedicated Server
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 03-19-2003, 12:27 PM
  5. BurstNet down??
    By Pluto in forum Web Hosting
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-13-2002, 10:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •