[anti-abuse-wg] Manual vs automated reports

"Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" wrote:

Hi all,

> If they send reports to $random addresses they don't really deserve a response

Thats a true word for prefessionals, but not for not-so-skilled
reporter, that are happy to find out, that there is something like RIPE
and a whois showing them who is responsible for a resource, if they
get abused.


Anyway, I like the proposal to stay like it is with one address.
Its up to the receiver to sort incoming mails, automation is easy,
procmail and ticketsystems are the admins friend ...

One single address (that is mandatory and will exist for every object)
will make it much more easy for not-skilled users to simply report
only to this address, especially, when they get whatever response
or at least can see, they their reports do not bounce
(and I guess that there will be less bounces. ISPs that
take repsonsibility, will read them, the others will send them
to devnull, but most will actually accept them and keep the
address working, because they must fear, that the NCC will test them
one day).

Its up to the community to communicate, that reports should
ONLY go to this address (and maybe up to the NCC to supply
tools online, that only return the abuse-c email address).

A simple "Got abused from our services ? Enter the IP
here and see whos responsible" on every ISPs webpage,
imprint and on www.ripe.net will surely help a lot ...


Kind regards, Frank

>
> Mr. Michele Neylon
> Blacknight
> http://Blacknight.tel
>
> Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity
>
> On 25 Jul 2012, at 13:21, "Thor Kottelin" <thor.kottelin at turvasana.com> wrote:
>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:anti-abuse-wg-
>>> bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Tobias Knecht
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 3:04 PM
>>> To: Alessandro Vesely; anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
>>
>>> The point I would
>>> make
>>> here is, that there are techniques in place that can separate
>>> reports
>>> and that can proof authentication and that abuse departments can or
>>> should use them
>>
>> I agree, especially as many reporters anyhow seem to use every @-containing
>> string their Whois lookup returns.
>>
>> --
>> Thor Kottelin
>> http://www.anta.net/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>



-- 

Mit freundlichen Gruessen,
--
MOTD: "have you enabled SSL on a website or mailbox today ?"
--
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
======================================================================