<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style></style></head><body lang=PT link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I like this approach, should be like what Elad Wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>To my opinion, Ripe should create its own anti-abuse system, each LIR will have login access to it (LIR will be able to choose to receive notifications through sms / email) and to mark each abuse complaint as resolved or not (that system can also have an API so LIR's will be able to pull their abuse complaints), the main issue is that complaints to that system will not be able to be done automatically or by email - only manually by form filling with captcha. (after the LIR will mark an abuse complain as resolved - the complainer will receive an email address also to confirm with him if issue is resolved or not, non-detailed statistics will be able to be displayed to the whole community - to see the percentage of how many manual complaints weren't handled by each LIR)”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>No Spam, accountable, possible to integrate with LIR system, possible to have public rate about “abuse dealing”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:14.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b>De:</b> anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> <b>Em Nome De </b>Elad Cohen<br><b>Enviada:</b> 29 de abril de 2020 11:15<br><b>Para:</b> anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net; Serge Droz <serge.droz@first.org><br><b>Assunto:</b> Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Discussion Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>What is this ?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>"However, the community should report any situation to the RIPE NCC, which can provide (anonymous) periodical statistics to the community, which can take further decisions about that."<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Ripe members are informers?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>"divide and conquer" strategy ?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Abuse email addresses (just like any other email address) are being spammed, not only by non-relevant spammers but also by automatic useless services that are installed at servers that don't take themselves any measure of proper configuration to avoid the automatic useless services.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>To my opinion, Ripe should create its own anti-abuse system, each LIR will have login access to it (LIR will be able to choose to receive notifications through sms / email) and to mark each abuse complaint as resolved or not (that system can also have an API so LIR's will be able to pull their abuse complaints), the main issue is that complaints to that system will not be able to be done automatically or by email - only manually by form filling with captcha. (after the LIR will mark an abuse complain as resolved - the complainer will receive an email address also to confirm with him if issue is resolved or not, non-detailed statistics will be able to be displayed to the whole community - to see the percentage of how many manual complaints weren't handled by each LIR)<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>---<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Besides the above, I also believe that we as a community should not accept complainers which are not taking the most basic configuration actions to protect their systems, and would consider these complaints as spam. In order for abuse complaints not to be abused.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Respectfully,<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Elad<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><hr size=2 width="98%" align=center></span></div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg<br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, April 29, 2020 11:22 AM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net">anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Discussion Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Hi All<br><br>I think this is a good policy.<br><br>We can always find use cases where it fails, but it will help in some<br>cases.<br><br>And if some one is not able to answer an e-mail every six month, there<br>are probably underlying issues. Also the argument, that the bad guys<br>flood the mailbox is not really acceptable. It just means you can't<br>filter spam.<br><br>The proposal does not check how the reports are used. But it helps us to<br>enumerate organizations, that don't act, coming up with various excuses,<br>along the lines the best problems are some one else's problems, so let's<br>make it some on else's problem.<br><br>The fact is: Most mature organizations are perfectly capable of handling<br>such mail boxes, even if they have a high load.<br><br>Coming from the incident response side, I'm tiered of people constantly<br>telling me, that issues are not their problem<br><br>Best<br>Serge<br><br><br><br><br><br>On 28.04.20 16:01, Petrit Hasani wrote:<br>> Dear colleagues,<br>> <br>> A new version of RIPE policy proposal, 2019-04, "Validation of<br>> "abuse-mailbox"", is now available for discussion.<br>> <br>> This proposal aims to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:" information<br>> more often and introduces a new validation process.<br>> <br>> Most of the text has been rewritten following the last round of<br>> discussion and the proposal is now at version 3.0. Some key points in<br>> this version:<br>> <br>> - The abuse-mailbox should not force the sender to use a form<br>> - The validation process must ensure that the abuse mailbox is able to<br>> receive messages<br>> - The validation should happen at least every six months<br>> <br>> You can find the full proposal at:<br>> <a href="https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-04" target="_blank">https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-04</a><br>> <br>> As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this<br>> four-week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide<br>> feedback to the proposer.<br>> <br>> At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of<br>> the Anti-Abuse Working Group Chairs, will decide how to proceed with the<br>> proposal.<br>> <br>> We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to<br>> <<a href="mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net">anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net</a>> before 27 May 2020.<br>> <br>> Kind regards,<br>> --<br>> Petrit Hasani<br>> Policy Officer<br>> RIPE NCC<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br><br>-- <br>Dr. Serge Droz<br>Chair of the FIRST Board of Directors<br><a href="https://www.first.org" target="_blank">https://www.first.org</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></body></html>