[anti-abuse-wg] @EXT: RE: working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

Obviously every user should lock their doors / protect themselves 
against fraud. I am just saying that the ability of many service 
providers to curtail abuse of their system (without impacting legitimate 
uses) is very limited as it may not their customers doing the abusing 
and any targeted action against those customers themselvesd would be 
inappropriate and affect many legitimate users of their services.

At what point should a network service provider remove privileges from a 
customer that is himself being abused but is technically unable to deal 
with it properly? Would the complaint not be better directed at that 
customer, not the provider, since they are the ones that can resolve 
this issue in a more targetted and appropriate manner? How does the 
service provider differentiate between a customer that is abusing vs one 
that is being abused? Deputising the service providers will not 
necessarily solve the problems, and possibly create many new ones.

In the domain industry, we were required to provide an abuse contact, 
however the reports we get to that address usually deal with issues we 
cannot do much about other than pulling or deactivating the domain name, 
which is usually the nuclear option. So we spend our time forwarding 
abuse mails to our customers that the complainant should have sent to 
the customer directly.

Best,

volker


Am 16.01.2020 um 15:16 schrieb Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg:
> Hi Volker
>
> On 16/01/2020 15:03, Volker Greimann wrote:
>> isn't making the world (and the internet) first and foremost a job of
>> law enforcement agencies like the police and Europol?
> Law enforcement's job primarily is arresting criminals. And yes they do
> prevention. But you can't stop locking your door or walk by fight just
> ignoring it, because it's LEA's job.
>
> This is even more true on the internet, where CERT's have long been
> working together fighting cybercrime etc.
>
> While there obviously is an appeal to the notion of "The best problems
> are some one else's problem" my believe is we don't want to have an
> internet or a world, for that matter, where this is how things run. The
> internet is a bottom up thing, it is so cool because people follow
> protocols, that are not law.
>
> There was a time whn this wasn't a given: During the "Browser wars"
> different producer leveraged ambiguities in the HTML standard, and the
> end result was horrible.
>
> We don't want this. If we delegate the problem, we've already lost.
>
> Best
> Serge
>
>
>
-- 
Volker A. Greimann
General Counsel and Policy Manager
*KEY-SYSTEMS GMBH*

T: +49 6894 9396901
M: +49 6894 9396851
F: +49 6894 9396851
W: www.key-systems.net

Key-Systems GmbH is a company registered at the local court of 
Saarbruecken, Germany with the registration no. HR B 18835
CEO: Alexander Siffrin

Part of the CentralNic Group PLC (LON: CNIC) a company registered in 
England and Wales with company number 8576358.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20200116/807f5a51/attachment.html>