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/[email protected]/
[anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Andreas Worbs
anw at artfiles.de
Wed Mar 3 15:25:46 CET 2021
There are plenty of blacklists and there is no need to "support" just those two. So i totally agree that the RIPE should expand the list or remove it Am 03.03.21 um 12:31 schrieb Nuno Vieira via anti-abuse-wg: > Hi. > > Let me disagree on this misconcept of "endorsement" or "reference" or > "reporting". > > There are **plenty** blacklists out there. > > RIPE reports specifically UCEPROTECT and SPAMHAUS. > > This kind of usage and reference by RIPE empirically > supports/endorses/make those as a reference. (or a troll feeded) > > If ripe community dont feel it that way then, imo they should either: > > a) add more blacklists checks and not only those (in order to avoid > discrimination to other blacklist operators) > > or > > b) remove blacklist reports at all, so it keeps a neutral position on > this. > > btw, how many of you already got fresh allocations from RIPE that were > blacklisted from some of those, and had challenges to start using those > and/or get them scrubbed raise the hand. > > cheers > /nuno > > > On Wed, 2021-03-03 at 12:16 +0100, Gert Doering wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:57:13AM +0100, Esa Laitinen wrote: >>> This indeed puts the uceprotect in a different category in my >>> books. >>> Please forget what I wrote earlier in this chain. >> I do have my own opinion about uceprotect (and it's not favourable), >> but >> we do not need to actually discuss "do we as community like their >> service >> or not" or "do we endorse it or not". >> >> The RIPE-Stats-Plugin provides *reporting*, and if someone's IP space >> ends >> up on a blacklist that is actually used by people, it is useful >> information >> to be told about it. >> >> This is why uceprotect is listed there, not because "RIPE endorses >> it". >> >> Gert Doering >> -- NetMaster > -- Mit freundlichem Gruß Artfiles New Media GmbH Andreas Worbs Artfiles New Media GmbH | Zirkusweg 1 | 20359 Hamburg Tel: 040 - 32 02 72 90 | Fax: 040 - 32 02 72 95 E-Mail: support at artfiles.de | Web: http://www.artfiles.de Geschäftsführer: Harald Oltmanns | Tim Evers Eingetragen im Handelsregister Hamburg - HRB 81478 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OpenPGP_signature Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 840 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20210303/9834ff6e/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]