[anti-abuse-wg] Spam FAQs need revision, was 2011-06 New Policy

Dear colleagues,

Thank you for your comments.

We have published new FAQs on spam/hacking. You can find them online at: 
http://www.ripe.net/data-tools/db/faq/faq-hacking-spamming

We will add further information in the coming months to support the 
implementation of new procedures.

Best regards,

Laura Cobley
RIPE NCC Customer Services Manager


On 12/13/11 12:39 PM, Laura Cobley wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> We are working on improving the procedures and documentation in the area
> of reporting abuse. As part of this work, we have already rewritten the
> FAQs currently being discussed on this list.
>
> We will inform you as soon as the revised FAQs are published.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Laura Cobley
> RIPE NCC Customer Services Manager
>
>
> On 12/12/11 11:44 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>> All,
>> some of the replies to spam FAQs are bad.
>>
>> FAQ#1 (What is spam?) looks good enough to me. So I'd start with
>> FAQ#2 that Leo brought up recently
>>
>> On 01/Dec/11 16:27, Leo Vegoda wrote:
>>> Hi Tobias, You wrote:
>>>
>>>> The naive user should use the abuse finder tool which is already
>>>> in place and would run much easier than today
>>>
>>> I disagree and I support the RIPE NCC's answer in its abuse FAQ:
>>>
>>> http://www.ripe.net/data-tools/db/faq/faq-hacking-spamming/should-i-just-ignore-spam
>>>
>>
>> I too disagree with Tobias' statement, at least for some values of
>> "naive user". Nevertheless, that FAQ's answer is bad. It reads:
>>
>> Should I just ignore spam?
>>
>> Yes. We recommend that you simply ignore and delete any spam
>> emails you get. Spam is a universal problem and there is not much
>> that can be done to stop it. However, if you do want to try to
>> find out where the spam is originating from you can follow the
>> steps in FAQ 5.
>>
>> I propose the following replacement text:
>>
>> Should I just ignore spam?
>>
>> Your mailbox provider may equip you with some means to report
>> spam. If you can conveniently deploy such means using your
>> preferred email client, please do so. Otherwise, we recommend
>> that you simply ignore and delete any spam emails you get. Your
>> email client may provide you with filters to do so automatically.
>>
>> Spam is a social problem, not a technical one. Therefore,
>> technical remedies tend to get rather complicated. If you are a
>> mailbox provider or want to learn more about how to find out where
>> the spam is originating from, you can follow the steps in the FAQ
>> entry "How can I counter spam?"
>>
>> Please note that FAQ#5 currently asks "What can I do to stop spam
>> emails?" Since FAQ entries are not numbered, referring to "FAQ 5" is
>> ambiguous, so I quoted its text, and changed the question while at it.
>> FAQ#5 needs an even deeper revision, but please let's tackle them one
>> at a time.
>>
>> Does everyone agree with the replacement text for FAQ#2?
>>
>>> The overwhelming majority of abuse is perpetrated by skilled
>>> professionals who work hard to hide their tracks. Telling ordinary
>>> Internet users that they have a useful role in identifying abuse
>>> sources and reporting them to the hosting networks is a cruel lie.
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>>> The scale of the problem requires large scale sampling and
>>> statistical analysis rather than individual reports.
>>
>> In part agreed. Individual reports are useful because humans can
>> complement automated filters in detecting spam, albeit both make
>> errors. At any rate, I agree individual reports are to be collected.
>> That's why I'm proposing to amend that entry.
>>
>>
>
>