[anti-abuse-wg] Manual vs automated reports

On Wed 25/Jul/2012 08:29:55 +0200 Luis Muñoz wrote:
> 
> I also think that there's value in providing a better mechanism for
> the receiver. Receivers who want to do everything through a single 
> channel, could set the two addresses to the same value.

I cannot publish something like "Hey, this is my <a href=...>bulk
address</a>;  this <a href=...>other one</a> is for my mother-in-law
only."   Well, I could.  But, in Arnold's words, using the right
address would still depend on everyone's goodwill...

> Receivers who want to action them through separate pipelines, now
> will have a way to do that.

An alternative is to separate the pipelines for each and every report
generator.  Good abuse reporters may realize that need.  They can set
up a full blown abuse-reporting web shop, where senders can login,
change reporting address, see statistics, and the like.  Much like
AOL's FBL, except that they send you an auto-subscribe link on the
first abuse they report to you, rather than require you to subscribe
beforehand.  That way, they can run an FBL even if they are not quite
the size of AOL.

> Receivers who prefer not to receive bulk abuse reports, can signal
> that.

It is probably more effective to just redirect the abuse-mailbox to
/dev/null.