[members-discuss] Regarding Elad Cohen's nomination and emails

Dear Elad,


I was one of them who appreciated your idea and promoted, but to keep the discussion on this forum will not earn you much. You need to put this on the  table to the right forum so it can be treated seriously and healthy debate make it acceptable.

I hope you track down your path towards next stage.

regards

Atif Naveed

From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> On Behalf Of Elad Cohen
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 3:09 PM
To: anthony.somerset at cloudunboxed.net; 'Cynthia Revström' <me at cynthia.re>; 'Sascha Luck [ml]' <ripe-md at c4inet.net>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Regarding Elad Cohen's nomination and emails

Anthony,

Everything that you wrote here are false and incorrect, I only responded to a person that was called an antisemitic and a racist, not by me, but by many other people in the Nanog list.


  *   There is comments that "could" be considered defamatory - especially when there is limited to no evidence to prove the comment
  *   You continue to harass/bully/attack other members of the list just because they don't agree with your opinion
  *   You are continuing to throw accusations around again without material evidence.
  *   You are wishing to run for a position of authority which arguably calls you to a far higher standard with regards to how you put your message across


My comments below in green regarding the fallacies that you raised:


  *   The required infrastructure globally would be phenomenal - Spamhaus already have such infrastructure in place and they are being sponsored (they don't sell a service at spamhaus.org), so it is feasible
  *   It would also require far more systems level expertise than is realised (think database replication/caching etc) - especially when you compare this to say, operating one of the root level nameservers or AS112 or RPKI - If system are designed well and developed well then maintenance is low, I don't see this problem as you do
  *   It would for many place an unacceptable "single" point of failure in your proposed system - Bgp anycast deployment will avoid it
  *   Who would pay for this service? How? What is the pricing model? - RIRs + ccTLDs Registries , and after it the many site owners that will want their newsletters to reach the mailboxes with 100% reliability
  *   Centralising the management has issues - for stability issues bgp anycast will be used, for security and privacy issues - hashing will be used, currently each newsletter subscribers are also centralized, for example mailchimp is a centralized service with many 'mailing list' email addresses. And mailing lists owner will not be obligated to use NoSpam.org - they will still be able to use MailChimp or to save their newsletter system locally - in this case they shouldn't send newselleter with links/images/url's - if their subscribers are using upgraded email clients, simple mailing lists with simple plain text will reach the inboxes - no matter if the domain owner will choose to create a mailing list through NoSpam.org or to implement it on his server with a 3rd party newsletter software.
  *   DATA protection/GPDR compliance - just because its hashed doesn't make you any less responsible - There will be a checkbox in the registration form for the end-user for accepting terms and privacy policy, and any domain owner that will open an account at NoSpam.org will also have a checkbox that he read the terms and privacy policy.
  *   Risk of hash collisions? - is this an issue to be concerned about? It's a good point, hashes can be splited - meaning that each email address will have two hashes - for the two parts before and after @ , in order to minimize the risk of hash collision, in a rare case of collision the end-user will see a newsletter that was emailed directly to him but the user didn't subscribe for it, the user will be able to blacklist.
  *   Like Root Certificates - getting mail client vendors to update just for your system is going to be exceptionally difficult if not impossible) - once the 5 RIRs and the ccTLDs are ready for this task - I believe that with all of their power it will be possible to recruit client vendors to update.


Respectfully,
Elad
________________________________
From: anthony.somerset at cloudunboxed.net<mailto:anthony.somerset at cloudunboxed.net> <anthony.somerset at cloudunboxed.net<mailto:anthony.somerset at cloudunboxed.net>>
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 2:35 PM
To: Elad Cohen <elad at netstyle.io<mailto:elad at netstyle.io>>; 'Cynthia Revström' <me at cynthia.re<mailto:me at cynthia.re>>; 'Sascha Luck [ml]' <ripe-md at c4inet.net<mailto:ripe-md at c4inet.net>>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> <members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>>
Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Regarding Elad Cohen's nomination and emails


Wow well over 100 emails over the weekend on this topic...



For the record - I have no ties to the Spamhaus project, I don't personally use it and I can't say I knowingly know anyone connected to the project in any material way



Elad - your behaviour and your responses continue to be inflammatory in nature (among other things) despite a good many people saying enough now. Please just stop.



Its one thing to have an opinion and air it - I would not want to prevent this from happening but its another thing entirely when



  *   There is comments that "could" be considered defamatory - especially when there is limited to no evidence to prove the comment
  *   You continue to harass/bully/attack other members of the list just because they don't agree with your opinion
  *   You are continuing to throw accusations around again without material evidence.
  *   You are wishing to run for a position of authority which arguably calls you to a far higher standard with regards to how you put your message across



Remember you have a right to your opinion, just like we also respectively have the right not to listen to it and/or pick it apart as long as we all keep things civilised and follow the relevant good conduct guidelines in effect.



This behaviour would quite frankly get you fired at many companies so why do you consider it acceptable here? You ultimately only are making yourself look worse



To the Ripe NCC Moderators/Admin team - if there is some formal channel that I can now make my complaint known or to request at the very least an immediate moderation of Elad Cohen's submissions to this mailing list please urgently advise. I would like to formally agree with Cynthia and others' complaints on this matter



Back to the "idea" that triggered this particular wave of arguments, there are a huge number of fallacies with the idea



  *   The required infrastructure globally would be phenomenal
  *   It would also require far more systems level expertise than is realised (think database replication/caching etc) - especially when you compare this to say, operating one of the root level nameservers or AS112 or RPKI
  *   It would for many place an unacceptable "single" point of failure in your proposed system
  *   Who would pay for this service? How? What is the pricing model?
  *   Centralising the management has issues
  *   DATA protection/GPDR compliance - just because its hashed doesn't make you any less responsible
  *   Risk of hash collisions? - is this an issue to be concerned about?
  *   Like Root Certificates - getting mail client vendors to update just for your system is going to be exceptionally difficult if not impossible)



Now on the matter of centralising the running of such a system is problematic, especially when you consider that this system is fundamentally a trust based system, you are relying in faith that the responsible guardians of said systems are to be trusted to act responsibly and not to the detriment of others. For some operators in the internet space there are known issues of people doing bad stuff (BGP hijacking, internet shutdowns etc) and I know of at least one RIR (not RIPE) that has not exactly operated fully within their own constitutional mandate and processes in recent times. A good friend of mine and work colleague, Andrew Alston, recently wrote a related article about trust and centralisation as it relates to RPKI - https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rpki-things-being-considered-andrew-alston/ a lot of the comments made there probably equally apply to any proposed mail filtering solution.



To be totally frank - the only real way to solve the email spam problem is just to turn off email entirely and replace it with some other better architected solution, everything else is realistically a band-aid that people will find ways around.



Kind Regards

Anthony Somerset



From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net>> On Behalf Of Elad Cohen
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 12:59 PM
To: Cynthia Revström <me at cynthia.re<mailto:me at cynthia.re>>; Sascha Luck [ml] <ripe-md at c4inet.net<mailto:ripe-md at c4inet.net>>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Regarding Elad Cohen's nomination and emails



Cynthia,



The sick person which you are referring to and is your colleague from "The Spamhaus Project", defamed me for many many months, here in Ripe and in Nanog, he called me by many names without a single proof. He was called an antisemitic and a  racist not by me - but by people which are not related to me in Nanog. After many months I provided an official response in Ripe. I didn't hear your voice when he defamed me for many many months with him calling me by many names. So obviously your interests are hidden.



In the other working groups - I only replied to him, and I didn't hear your voice regarding your sick colleague initial message with name callings towards me when I only replied to his attack on me. And his personal attack on me is exactly like your personal attack on me now - you are afraid that an alternative solution to "The Spamhaus Project" will be implemented if I will be elected.



Respectfully,

Elad

________________________________

From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net>> on behalf of Cynthia Revström <me at cynthia.re<mailto:me at cynthia.re>>
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 1:50 PM
To: Sascha Luck [ml] <ripe-md at c4inet.net<mailto:ripe-md at c4inet.net>>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> <members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>>
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Regarding Elad Cohen's nomination and emails



> The RIPE *NCC* has no business either enforcing "professionality"
on the *community* mailing lists - this is the WG chairs'
responsibility.



AFAIK there are no WG chairs of members-discuss and members-discuss is a mailing list that the RIPE NCC hosts to let RIPE NCC members discuss RIPE NCC membership related topics, so I think they certainly have business enforcing people to be professional on this mailing list.



I would also like to add that Elad has multiple times on different mailing lists ignored the WG chairs.

Also this is happening across a variety of RIPE/RIPE NCC mailing lists that are all hosted by the RIPE NCC and as such I think it is their business to keep them to a professional standard.



> If I'm wrong, where do

I submit the list of people I'd like to see excluded from the
community?



There should not be a long list of people, but when someone is behaving unprofessionally, calling people "coconut", being defamatory towards the RIPE NCC, ignoring WG chairs, I do think that they have gone too far and everything has a limit.

Like we wouldn't allow someone to send sales emails to the mailing list as an example, aka limits on what is allowed.



- Cynthia



On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:43 PM Sascha Luck [ml] <ripe-md at c4inet.net<mailto:ripe-md at c4inet.net>> wrote:

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:02:59AM +0200, Cynthia Revstrm wrote:
>I would like to propose that the RIPE NCC ban Elad Cohen from interacting
>with the RIPE Community (via Meetings or mailing lists) due to his blatant
>disregard for the Code of Conduct and for being hostile towards others in
>the community. As the RIPE NCC hosts and manages these lists I think the
>RIPE NCC has a responsibility to keep the lists professional and to remove
>those who repeatedly ignore what the WG chairs are saying.

The RIPE *NCC* has no business either enforcing "professionality"
on the *community* mailing lists - this is the WG chairs'
responsibility. Nor do I think the NCC should determine who can
be a member of the RIPE community or not. If I'm wrong, where do
I submit the list of people I'd like to see excluded from the
community?
I think this proposal is the most out-of-order thing I've yet
seen in this thread.

rgds,
Sascha Luck

>
>- Cynthia

>_______________________________________________
>members-discuss mailing list
>members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>
>https://mailman.ripe.net/
>Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/ripe-md%40c4inet.net


_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>
https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/me%40cynthia.re
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20200427/db13fcdc/attachment.html>