Fwd: [anti-abuse-wg] Antispam measures
- Previous message (by thread): Fwd: [anti-abuse-wg] Antispam measures
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
peter håkanson
peter at hk.ipsec.se
Wed Oct 21 12:38:49 CEST 2009
Begin forwarded message: > From: peter håkanson <peter at hk.ipsec.se> > Date: October 21, 2009 11:33:51 AM GMT+02:00 > To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at bfk.de> > Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Antispam measures > content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes > mime-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1076) > x-universally-unique-identifier: fcad27c0-c289-49cd-80b3-1b91332e229d > in-reply-to: <82vdi9uo14.fsf at mid.bfk.de> > content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable > x-smtp-server: bore.hk.ipsec.se > message-id: <5036E015-CC9D-4D2E-AD84-FB340601B07F at hk.ipsec.se> > references: <COL117-W30F981CC6FF1583F0A2A20D2C00 at phx.gbl> <82vdi9uo14.fsf at mid.bfk.de > > > > > On Oct 21, 2009, at 10:52 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> * Chimel Chimel: >> >>> 1) Does RIPE or other registrars impose antispam fighting measures >>> or a code of conduct to the ISPs or telcos it allocates IP ranges >>> to? >> >> No, not that I know. >> >>> For instance, do these registrar customers specifically sign an >>> agreement never to post spam themselves. Do they also sign an >>> agreement to terminate IP sub-allocation or contract with their own >>> customers who are using their IP addresses to post spam? >> >> No, surely not. That would be poor service. You don't want to lose >> your IP resources just because your infrastructure has been >> compromised. 8-( > > On the contrary, a real risk of loosing their allocation might be > a good motivation to run their shop accordingly. As of today some > providers don't care ( and will benefit from spammers). > > Just like alkohol-serving firms ( bars etc) if they don't run ther bar > according to local rules they will loose the permits. > We don't allow sleazy hospitals either. Why should we permit > sleazy ISP's to poison our vital infrastructure ?? > >> >>> 2) If there is such measures, how does RIPE enforce them? >> >> There is no enforcement. >> >>> 3) What does RIPE intends to do about Ukrtelecom, who is alone >>> responsible for hundreds of thousands of daily spam posts in >>> discussion forums and BBSs? >> >> Well ... >> >>> According to the people in stopforumspam.com, every single post >>> emanating from ukrtelecom is spam, there is not a single genuine >>> user from that telco. >> >> ... so you should be lucky that it's so easy to filter that type of >> spam. If you shut down netblocks, the badness just spreads far and >> wide and gets more difficult to track. >> >> Of course, if the activity is indeed illegal, it should be stopped. >> One problem we face is that a lot of questionable practices (DNS >> poisoning, injecting pop-ups with ads, installing software on PCs >> without informed consent) are also carried out by obviously >> legitimate >> businesses, so it's often difficult to convince a prosecutor that >> it's >> illegal. >> >> On top of that, many legal scholars claim that in the EU, once you >> say >> the magic word, "telco", you are no longer responsible for the >> traffic >> you handle, much like anyone could seek asylum in Germany (until we >> got rid of this constitutional guarantee in the 90s, which was rather >> disappointing because nothing expresses your national wealth better >> than an almost unconditional willingness to share it). This blanket >> liability exemption is the root of the problem, and it is pretty much >> unique to the telco sector, at least in its generality. It has to >> go. > > We don't have to resort to legal discussions here , if RIPE supplies > goods > under some conditions, any breakage of that condition is enought > to terminate the contract. It's a deal between business partners. >> >>> I'd like to see the whole list in order to ban it all from my forum, >>> even if it means banning genuine users from Ukraine. >> >> The relevant parts of the RIPE database is available from >> ftp.ripe.net. In the past, I've generated anti-abuse ACLs from mnt- >> by >> handles, which was surprisingly effective. Using BGP might help as >> well. >> >> -- >> Florian Weimer <fweimer at bfk.de> >> BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/ >> Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1 >> D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99 >> >> >> > > > ====================================================== > Peter Håkanson Phone +46707328101 Fax +4631223190 > IPSec sverige Email peter at ipsec.se > "Safe by design" Address Bror Nilssons gata 16 > Lundbystrand > S-417 55 Gothenburg Sweden > > > ====================================================== Peter Håkanson Phone +46707328101 Fax +4631223190 IPSec sverige Email peter at ipsec.se "Safe by design" Address Bror Nilssons gata 16 Lundbystrand S-417 55 Gothenburg Sweden
- Previous message (by thread): Fwd: [anti-abuse-wg] Antispam measures
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]