[anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 53, Issue 13

Gentlemen, excuse me but you are discussing the sex of angels.
At least we, the victims of abuse, do not need abuse-c or any information 
about spammers and scammers. All we need is the sp(c)am IP and an honest 
attitude of the ISPs.
This IP is available, but the honest attitude of ISPs is far from 
satisfactory. With exceptions, of course!

For the victim of abuse, know who and where the spammer is, it will only be 
useful if he is in their area. In this case we do not need Registrars, 
neither police nor rulers. Using social networks I have joined 150 victims 
of abuse at the door of a spammer. We no longer receive spam of that person.

Regarding the attitude of ISPs with SCAMMER customer, I will give you real 
numbers, own experience:

1- By reporting with evidence, a scammer, for the first time, 90% of ISPs do 
not take any action. Note that I am talking about scammers.

2- By reporting with evidence, the same scammer, to the same ISP, for the 
second time, 50% of ISPs do nothing. This is unacceptable!

3- By reporting with evidence, the same scammer, to the same ISP, for the 
third time, 20% of ISPs do not take any action and continue hosting their 
scammer customer or delivering their scam. That's a crime! Conspiracy to 
practice crime. It is a police matter and they must be arrested.

The most significant example of this criminal attitude is Amazonaws.com 
acting above the law and of its AUP, hypocritically exposed on their 
website.

With one detail: that 20% of criminal ISPs do not bother with the fact that 
the accusations with evidence, are being copied to spam(at)uce.gov, 
gmail-abuse(at)google.com, abuse(at)registrar.xxx, 
lettersmailbox(at)economista.com, support(at)wsj.com, 
submit.snAXXem0rJTkVXXX(at)spam.spamcop.net, policy-staff(at)icann.org, 
guardian.readers(at)theguardian.com, krebsonsecurity(at)gmail.com, 
(at)antiphishing.org or apwg.org, privacy(at)council.bbb.org...

Regarding the attitude of ISPs with SPAMMER customer these percentages are 
even higher.

For civil society, privacy security, data available or not, none of that 
matters. What matters and is sufficient is an honest attitude of the ISPs.
Or do you clean the house or the rulers will criminalize your activities 
pressured by the civil society that is tired of being pestered by email 
marketing and bandits trying to steal their savings.

Thanks
Marilson



-----Mensagem Original----- 
From: anti-abuse-wg-request at ripe.net
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2016 8:00 AM
To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
Subject: anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 53, Issue 13

Send anti-abuse-wg mailing list submissions to
anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mailman.ripe.net/
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
anti-abuse-wg-request at ripe.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
anti-abuse-wg-owner at ripe.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of anti-abuse-wg digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
      (Michele Neylon - Blacknight)
   2. Re: [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
      (Florian Weimer)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 10:54:45 +0000
From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com>
To: "h.lu at anytimechinese.com" <h.lu at anytimechinese.com>, Jeffrey Race
<jrace at post.harvard.edu>
Cc: "pk at denic.de" <pk at denic.de>, "db-wg at ripe.net" <db-wg at ripe.net>,
"anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net" <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net>
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
Message-ID: <B376F13F-3752-401F-97E4-2182A0FE2192 at blacknight.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On 05/03/2016, 09:53, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of h.lu at anytimechinese.com" 
<anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net on behalf of h.lu at anytimechinese.com> wrote:



>Hi
>
>I fail to understand how spammer are legal in certain country  has to do 
>with my reasoning or logic.
>
>The argument is about if there is managing position for community to take, 
>my answer is no, we are not law enforcement and  we only do book keeping, 
>we don't tell people what to do, if they want to be good guy, great, if 
>they don't care about spam or any abuse so to say, ok, it's their call.


Who? A LIR or an assignee?

Considering the IPv4 space is such a valuable resource now I?d happily argue 
that if you do a bad job of managing it then maybe you shouldn?t have it


>Making things mandatory with no real enforcing power are just not working.

That?s more of a chicken and egg argument.

The issue that abuse-C resolves is the provision of a consistent and thus 
parseable contact point for abuse issues.

Of course if there was a way to get abuse contacts to be more responsive 
then everyone would be happier (or unhappier .. ).

>
>So make logic simple to understand, if the abuse is serious as crime, you 
>don't need abuse c to get the right person(law enforcement has much better 
>way than ripe db), if it is not serious as crime, if the op cares, with or 
>without abuse c they will have their abuse contact there, and will deal 
>with it. For ops don't care, with or without abuse c, they still don't 
>care.

The issue isn?t that simple. Prior to the introduction of abuse-c people 
would try to contact whatever contact they could find.


> So you can put up an extra line ask people to fill, but I don't think it 
> makes much difference.



--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
http://www.blacknight.host/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://ceo.hosting/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2016 11:57:14 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fw at deneb.enyo.de>
To: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
Cc: andre at ox.co.za, "Sascha Luck \[ml\]" <dbwg at c4inet.net>,
db-wg at ripe.net, anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal
2016-01
Message-ID: <87si05yyyd.fsf at mid.deneb.enyo.de>
Content-Type: text/plain

* Randy Bush:

>> there has to be accurate records for abuse-c
>
> really?  and how does abuse-c affect the effective operation of the ncc
> resource registry.

They can point law enforcement to a more reliable self-service tool, I
assume.



End of anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 53, Issue 13
*********************************************