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] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Thomas Hungenberg
th at cert-bund.de
Tue Feb 19 14:06:41 CET 2019
On 19.02.19 13:23, Carlos Friaças wrote:
> Regarding the non-"DE" the figures are worse, right?
The statistics are based on our automated reports only.
Our automated system is sending 8,000+ reports per day - but only
addresses abuse contacts for networks registered with country code
"DE" directly. Data for networks registered with other country codes
is sent with aggregated reports to the respective national CSIRTs.
I don't have any statistics on bounces for reports manually sent
to abuse contacts for networks in other countries directly.
But yes, it looks like the number of invalid contacts for networks
in other countries is (much) higher, in particular for Eastern Europe.
- Thomas
CERT-Bund Incident Response & Malware Analysis Team
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]