[anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Reporting Issues

Examples of shady networks aside (and there seem to be rather more in the
RIPE region than the average RIR has .. but that's another can of worms),
this is not a tools deficiency in RIPE NCC, I fully agree with Leo there.
 These tools are great.

I only wish I could say as much for the processes behind all this.

--srs

On Tuesday, March 12, 2013, Reza Farzan wrote:

> Hello Leo,
>
> You are right in stating that many networks "have no interest in handling
> the abuse reports."
>
> A good example is DetectNetwork.US that manages Net Range:
> 173.245.64.0 - 173.245.64.255. They have listed "abuse at detectnetworks.us<javascript:;>"
> as
> their abuse contact, but this address is invalid and any report sent to
> this
> address comes back with an error message.
>
> Apparently, www.egihosting.com is the parent company of DetectNetwork.US,
> and they might be aware of this problem, but the above incorrect address
> remains on the Whois listing.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Reza Farzan
>
>
> ***********
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net <javascript:;> [mailto:
> anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net <javascript:;>]
> On Behalf Of Leo Vegoda
> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 10:25 PM
> To: Arnold
> Cc: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net <javascript:;>
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Reporting Issues
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mar 11, 2013, at 11:30 am, Arnold <wiegert at telus.net <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> [.]
>
> > Since I have been reporting SPAM for some time, missing, out-of-date  or
> > inaccurate contact information has always been a problem.
>
> It always will be. There were 43,809 maintainers in the database on 11
> March
> according to ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/split/ripe.db.mntner.gz. It
> doesn't take a particularly large churn in the staff or organisational
> structures at network operators for an appreciable fraction of the social
> data to become unreliable each year.
>
> > A number of contact addresses are listed as some public general mail
> > server such as gmail, hotmail etc.
> > All of those are pretty much useless.
> > Since RIPE registers the actual user, it should insist on a usable
> > contact address at the registering organization.
>
> I think you are equating the requirement to list an address with a
> commitment to actually handle abuse reports. While there's nothing wrong
> with improving contact information publication tools, it's the will to
> handle the reports that's really important. If people want to receive
> reports and use the information to improve their network operations they
> will make sure they are easy to contact. The reason people do not publish
> useful contact information is because they have no interest in handling the
> reports and not because of a deficiency in the tools provided by the RIPE
> NCC or any other RIR.
>
> Regards,
>
> Leo
>
>
>
>

-- 
--srs (iPad)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20130312/8d092da8/attachment.html>