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] WHOIS (AS204224)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] WHOIS (AS204224)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] WHOIS (AS204224)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ronald F. Guilmette
rfg at tristatelogic.com
Wed Nov 4 23:44:15 CET 2015
In message <0F2494D8-D060-4496-807A-ABBE30D264F0 at gmail.com>, (in response to Sascha Luck) Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at gmail.com> wrote: >I doubt - > >1. You are being asked to code this for RIPE NCC >... For the record, I agree completely with Sascha Luck on this one. CAPTCHAs are an awful idea in this context. I hate them. Everybody hates them. They are only useful when one is trying to keep random anonymous idiots from spamming your blog... a blog which otherwise allows comments from random anonymous idiots. But we were discussing validation of phone numbers allegedly belonging *not* to anonymous people/entities, but rather to people/entities that are in fact *known* to RIPE (and which already have, or which can pretty easily create a RIPE login account). Bottom line: I don't see CAPTCHAs as being at all useful in a phone validation system. That having been said it might still be either necessary or advisable to put a CAPTCHA in front of the RIPE account creation process, e.g. if there isn't one there already, just to stop some mindless automaton from trying to create 100,000 new RIPE accounts on some given day. Regards, rfg
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] WHOIS (AS204224)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] WHOIS (AS204224)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]