One concern with doing this as a whole is you may end up blocking legit organizations from accessing your site. If you're selling something that could be a problem.
For example, the org might be self-hosting WireGuard or another VPN solution on a cloud provider and people are connecting through that so their outgoing IP address comes from a cloud provider.
A big and and not so big enterprises these days uses VPN and similar solutions with exit nodes in the cloud so such blocks essentially prevents access to your web site from a work computer.
I think it should be reciprocal, like in the real world. If someone blocks a provider, a provider should be allowed to block back. Maybe with some automatism. So it is fair and each party has information about what is going on. Or using real guns instead of these children games in the sandbox.
So if I run a web server at home and I’m constantly attacked by AWS IPs, I shouldn’t be able to block them without myself being unable to access the lion’s share of the web hosted on AWS? Doesn’t that seem sort of extreme?
> I think it should be reciprocal, like in the real world. If someone blocks a provider, a provider should be allowed to block back. Maybe with some automatism. So it is fair and each party has information about what is going on. Or using real guns instead of these children games in the sandbox.
I don't think your take makes any sense whatsoever. Beyond the puerile "I'll block you too", what exactly do you hope to achieve with this nonsense?
nickjj|1 year ago
For example, the org might be self-hosting WireGuard or another VPN solution on a cloud provider and people are connecting through that so their outgoing IP address comes from a cloud provider.
theelous3|1 year ago
fpoling|1 year ago
blueflow|1 year ago
arcza|1 year ago
okr|1 year ago
ninkendo|1 year ago
blueflow|1 year ago
chipdart|1 year ago
I don't think your take makes any sense whatsoever. Beyond the puerile "I'll block you too", what exactly do you hope to achieve with this nonsense?