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] Correct info in RIPE-database
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Correct info in RIPE-database
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Correct info in RIPE-database
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Alessandro Vesely
vesely at tana.it
Sat Aug 13 19:46:49 CEST 2011
On 10.08.2011 12:45, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Think on the lines of "there are lots of people who vote for a > politician you consider a jackass, but he hardly ever wins an election > anyway" > > Then think how many complaints about a valid user you get when just > one or two stray emails of his get misreported, compared to when that > user gets his password compromised by a nigerian or has his PC > infected by a virus. This comparison apparently suggests that misreports ought to be handled and repaired, just like viruses or compromised passwords, however statistically negligible they might be. (It could even possible to devise methods to handle misreports so as to minimize the amount of time that the relevant abuse team has to spend on manual investigation.) Is that what you meant?
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Correct info in RIPE-database
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Correct info in RIPE-database
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]