[anti-abuse-wg] New Abuse Information on RIPE NCC Website

Ok. So, i dont work for spamhaus and only use them to filter mail at work.
Obviously, I dont speak for my employer either, just for myself.

The three cases in this thread arent related except that there are two
problems : criminals as customers, and a disinclination to, possibly based
on their interpretation of their country's laws, get these customers
removed.

A more recent case, the virut botnet, is interesting as other cctlds
operating in the EU (poland) did suspend several, as did russia. Last I
checked there were some still left .. in .at.

www.spamhaus.org/news/article/690/
 On Jun 26, 2013 7:13 PM, "Simon Forster" <simon-lists at ldml.com> wrote:

>
> As I'm about to shout "disclosure" at someone, I better mention that I'm
> affiliated with Spamhaus. I have no input / control / influence whatsoever
> on the listings side of things but I do work for a Spamhaus entity.
>
> On 26 Jun 2013, at 13:44, Wilfried Woeber <Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at> wrote:
>
> > Erik Bais wrote:
> > [...]
> >> For those that want to read up on what actually happened on that
> specific
> >> incident in Latvia (July/August 2010), have a read on the following open
> >> letter from CERT.lv
> >>
> >> https://cert.lv/uploads/uploads/OpenLetter.pdf
>
> This snippet brought to us by Erik Bais.
>
> Is this the same Erik Bais who filed a complaint with the Dutch police
> against Spamhaus in October 2011 <
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/13/dutch_isp_accuses_spamhaus/>?
>
> The MD of A2B who was providing connectivity to "German ISP Cyberbunker,
> aka CB3ROB"?
>
> With CyberBunker being heavily implicated in the recent DDoS attack
> against Spamhaus. Heavily in as much as "Sven Olaf Kamphuis, a vocal
> spokesman for CyberBunker, was arrested at the request of Dutch authorities
> near Barcelona by Spanish Police after collaboration through Eurojust" <
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CyberBunker>.
>
> Sir, I question your motives for bringing this up.
>
> > And this actually wasn't the only or the first "incident" with Spamhaus.
> > They also tried similer *piep*^Wbullying against NIC.at before.
> >
> > Which actually has discredited Spamhaus in my personal opinion for sure,
> > for knowingly disregarding local law, but that's slightly OT here - but
> > maybe not...
>
> Spamhaus is an organisation which publishes reputation datasets for users
> to do with as they wish. Many users wish to block inbound email based on
> Spamhaus' datasets. That's Spamhaus' users' prerogative. No pressure is
> exerted to use the lists.
>
> There are no fees charged for the removal of an entity from a Spamhaus
> blocklist – the problem which initiated the listing simply needs to have
> been resolved.
>
> The Spamhaus datasets consist of reputation lists – which is to say an
> entity's (Spamhaus') opinion as to the reputation of certain properties
> (IPs and domains). Third party, independent reports are used in any number
> of different industries to help organisations arrive at best possible
> decisions. In what way is this significantly different?
>
> Extortion or bullying is not being applied. Laws are not being broken –
> whatever spin people may try to put on this.
>
> Spamhaus' reputation lists have been published for over a decade now. Over
> that time some traction has built up to the point that slightly shy of two
> billion email accounts are protected (directly, indirectly or via
> derivative products) by the Spamhaus datasets. Such longevity and market
> acceptance has not been forced on anyone. Spamhaus simply does a damn good
> job and has done so for many years.
>
> Simon
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20130626/aaa6f157/attachment.html>