This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] 2010-08 New Policy Proposal (Abuse contact information)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2010-08 New Policy Proposal (Abuse contact information)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2010-08 New Policy Proposal (Abuse contact information)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Frank Gadegast
ripe-anti-spam-wg at powerweb.de
Thu Nov 11 12:31:04 CET 2010
Jørgen Hovland wrote: > > > On 11/11/10 10:21, Frank Gadegast wrote: >> >>> But making things mandatory doesn't solve poor design. >> >> >> ??? please explain, dont get it. >> > > > You are unable to find the (abuse) contact because you don't know where > to look, not that it isn't there because it wasn't mandatory. The abuse-mailbox-field is not mandatory, and it did not help at all. There are enough records, that have none (even from interested LIRs) or that hide there abuse contacts in remarks or simply think, that normal email-fields are enough, leaving the complainant with a guess, which one is right. So, it needs to be mandatory to have them all in one day. Give people a choice and they will choose to do nothing ;o) >> DDoS attacks happen every day, get detected and blocked. > Exactly. Just like spam. .. continues for ever. We just had one last month, that was really enoying. About 1300 machines hammered down a customers site. Our detection blocked them all in about 20 minutes, but the traffic still reached our edge routers and firewalls. This is enoying, because our upstream providers will not block single IPs on their side and we will have to pay the traffic, just to block it straight away. flow-control detected to original IPs (most Sender-IPs where faked), but it did not stop for about 3 weeks until the PCs with a trojan finally got the order from the attacker to do something else. We tried to inform the responsible admins, but only reached about 30% of them. The rest had no email at all or no valid email address or returned with the usual mailbox full or User unknown. Would love to raise this rate. >> There is no need for an email address of the admin-c. >> > I disagree, but it's optional and thats great. Def right. But this cannot be true for illegal actions ... Kind regards, Frank -- PHADE Software - PowerWeb http://www.powerweb.de Inh. Dipl.-Inform. Frank Gadegast mailto:frank at powerweb.de Schinkelstrasse 17 fon: +49 33200 52920 14558 Nuthetal OT Rehbruecke, Germany fax: +49 33200 52921 ====================================================================== Public PGP Key available for frank at powerweb.de
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2010-08 New Policy Proposal (Abuse contact information)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2010-08 New Policy Proposal (Abuse contact information)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]