[anti-abuse-wg] Definition of Internet Abuse * pre-final

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:35:09 -0300
"Marilson" <marilson.mapa at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think this group no one will give you the examples of abuse that
> you request. Do you know why? Because it's an affront to anyone's
> intelligence set the obvious. Maybe you need a technical definition

No. The simple truth is that there are no examples of:

1. Single resource abuse
2. PC theft (not related to network) as Internet Abuse
3.  Suresh says the proposed definition is too "narrow"  - It is simply
not the truth (- so no examples there either)
 
> and it is not abuse. If you do you will bury your company. Nobody
> needs of technical definitions of Internet abuse. 
> 
Just this very long thread and all the confusion about what is actually
Internet abuse and what is not - serves as plain and evident proof that
even this, an actual anti-abuse WG, desperately needs a definition of
Internet Abuse. Civil society is simply ignorant of their own
requirement(s).

> I'm hoping that your company becomes larger than SpamCop.
> SpamCop-Cisco is outdated and has acted partially protecting some
> companies. Its software is limited to search the records in Whois,

You are wrong about two things... Seeing as much of it is public
knowledge and it matters not that I share:

1. "my" blocklists (superblock.ascams.com dnsbl.ascams.com etc etc) is
not a company, my company or even "my" blocklists... it is simply a
group of private people, donating their own time , to fill a hole in
what SpamCop cannot do as the system works differently as a reporting
RBL... - superblock.ascams = non reporting and with CRIME focus...

2. I am also ac at spamcop.net - SpamCop is also a community although 
operated graciously and ethically by Cisco. We are all honorable,
ethical and honest people - I challenge you in public to tell me the
name or email address of one SpamCop member that is not that?

> which are often false or incomplete. My research to identify all
> those involved in abuse is better, bigger and more correct than the
> SpamCop. As a rule I even inform  the owner's name of subdomain under
> protection service of DomainsByProxy-Godaddy, CloudFlare, Whois
> Privacy Protect-Rightside, etc.
> 
okay

> On Aug 29, 2016 Suresh wrote:
> > So far this subthread has been a case of the blind leading the
> > blind, but Marilson is indeed correct here.
> Suresh, I am not blind yet. But as Diogenes of Sinope, in Ancient
> Greece, I try to find, with my lantern, an honest ISP. After hundreds
> of complaints I can tell you that I count on the fingers of one hand
> the ISPs that have acted correctly. It is noteworthy that there were
> many discussions, many fights, but never, I never had to discuss
> whether it was abuse or not. ;)
> Marilson

So, objection 1 and objection 2 is resolved and  only 3 remains:

---------------------------------------------------
3. Suresh says the proposed definition is too "narrow"  and I need to
consult with "abuse policy enforcement and network security" experts
to know or understand why.  
He also says: "Your definition of abuse will not stand."  
and abuse discussions about defining Internet Abuse is 
the "blind leading the blind"  
----------------------------------------------------

Again, what there is up to now, after much deliberation by many
and many off list emails and comments: 

============
Internet Abuse 
============

Understanding what constitutes Internet Abuse is not an easy
undertaking as the topic is sometimes very technical.  The Internet
consists of resources and the understanding of Internet abuse relates to
also understanding the use and interaction between these resources.

Examples of Internet resources include also processes, protocols,
credentials as well as other types of resources. More practical
examples could be Internet Protocol numbers, Domain names or even Email
addresses.

This technical definition of Internet abuse does not include identifying
the authority for any specific resource as it is not intended to define
any rights to resources but simply to define what technically
constitutes Internet abuse as it relates to all Internet resources.


======================
Definition of Internet abuse 
======================

"The non sanctioned use of a resource to infringe upon the usage rights
of another resource"

--------------------------------------------------------
Terminology used in the above definition
--------------------------------------------------------

(1) Resource
Any Internet Resource

(2) Use and Usage
Any direct or indirect action involving a resource

(3) Rights
The correct assignment or allocation of a resource by the authoritative
holder of such a resource which results in the entitlement or
reasonable 
expectation to use, or ability to use, such an allocated or assigned
resource

(4) Infringe
An action, event or situation which limits, reduces, undermines or
encroaches upon the fair use of a resource

(5) Sanctioned
Infringement upon the use of a resource by the assignor or
administrative holder of rights to a resource