[anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issuزe 14
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] SPF Record - Number of included DNS lookups
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Need policy to require abuse contacts to accept abuse reports
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mehdi Yazdani
yazdanitci at gmail.com
Fri Sep 16 19:18:52 CEST 2016
sent by my phone On Sep 13, 2016 6:04 PM, <anti-abuse-wg-request at ripe.net> wrote: > Send anti-abuse-wg mailing list submissions to > anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > anti-abuse-wg-request at ripe.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > anti-abuse-wg-owner at ripe.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of anti-abuse-wg digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 11 > (Michele Neylon - Blacknight) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 13:34:06 +0000 > From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com> > To: Marilson <marilson.mapa at gmail.com>, "anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net" > <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> > Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 11 > Message-ID: <4A78AF9F-3FBD-403C-A3C8-6C93E89F6650 at blacknight.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Non sanctioned in this context would mean ?without permission? > > > -- > Mr Michele Neylon > Blacknight Solutions > Hosting, Colocation & Domains > http://www.blacknight.host/ > http://blacknight.blog/ > http://www.blacknight.press - get our latest news & media coverage > http://www.technology.ie > Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 > Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 > Social: http://mneylon.social > Random Stuff: http://michele.irish > ------------------------------- > Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty > Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 > > From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of > Marilson <marilson.mapa at gmail.com> > Reply-To: Marilson <marilson.mapa at gmail.com> > Date: Tuesday 6 September 2016 at 22:57 > To: "anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net" <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> > Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 11 > > Someone could help a non-native to understand the meaning of the word > (SANCTIONED) used by Andre? > > In the definition of Internet Abuse: *The non sanctioned use...* > > And in defining the terminology: *(5) Sanctioned - Infringement upon...* > > The sanction verb as: > > - give permission or approval for > or > - impose a sanction or penalty on > > In both sentences ? SANCTIONED - as imposed sanction or permission and > sanction? > > Thanks > Marilson > > From: anti-abuse-wg-request at ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg-request at ripe.net > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 2:37 AM > To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> > Subject: anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 11 > > Send anti-abuse-wg mailing list submissions to > anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > anti-abuse-wg-request at ripe.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > anti-abuse-wg-owner at ripe.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of anti-abuse-wg digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Definition of Internet Abuse - The agony of trying to > unsubscribe (Marilson) > 2. Re: anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7 (Richard Clayton) > 3. Re: anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7 (ox) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 18:01:08 -0300 > From: "Marilson" <marilson.mapa at gmail.com> > To: <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> > Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] Definition of Internet Abuse - The agony of > trying to unsubscribe > Message-ID: <00A5F6C9CEEA4D26B48EF249C755BD90 at xPC> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > ?People say we live in an age of information overload. Right? I don't know > about that, but I just know that I get too many marketing emails.? > ?...I scrolled down to the bottom of the email, and I pressed, > "Unsubscribe." And I thought that'd be the end of it. But a week later, I > got another one that said,...? > ?And I thought, obviously, I haven't clicked hard enough. So I tried it > again. Right? Lo and behold, a week passes, you guessed it,...? > ?And I was really annoyed with them, and I thought, OK, I was about to > write a strongly worded email, which I can do quite well.? > > http://www.ted.com/talks/james_veitch_the_agony_of_trying_to_unsubscribe > > So Andre, people who do this say they are not committing INTERNET ABUSE > because they put a link to unsubscribe. This is too much hypocrisy or they > really believe that we are mentally feeble? > According to your concerns as you classify this attitude? > > I see billions of spam > > Red scam too > > I see them blomm > > For me and you > > And I think to myself > > What a wonderful word > > > > I see skies of shit > > And Clouds of bits > > The bright blessed day > > Become a dark pit > > And I think to myself > > What a wonderful word > > > > The colors of the messages > > So pretty in the sky > > Are also on the faces > > Of spammers going by > > I see friends wasting time > > Saying: "What can we do?" > > They are really saying > > "I hate all of you" > > Yes, I think to myself > > What a wonderful world > > > Thanks > Marilson > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/ > attachments/20160905/3b716662/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 03:41:56 +0100 > From: Richard Clayton <richard at highwayman.com> > To: ox <andre at ox.co.za> > Cc: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net > Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7 > Message-ID: <AGFTn+I0zizXFAOi at highwayman.com> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > In message , ox <andre at ox.co.za> writes > > >Dealing with your first point, I do agree and you are imho, quite > >correct about the abuse from legacy resources. > > no -- I was concerned about abuse OF legacy resources :( > > >However, the current definition of Internet abuse is: --> use of a > >resource to infringe upon the usage rights of another resource > > > >So, this caters exactly for ALL resources, including legacy resources... > > > >Thank you for your feedback about, sanctioned, but it exists only to > >reflect > > you've missed my point > > you define abuse as "non sanctioned" activity... that is, activity for > which permission has not been granted. Fair enough (so far as it goes) > > you then define "sanctioned" as being infringement :-( rather than > setting out a definition which has something to do with the complexity > of what permission means. > > - -- > richard Richard Clayton > > Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary > Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755 > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 > > iQA/AwUBV84s9Du8z1Kouez7EQI4KACgvPCyK4SimvypTL/bmW79vlB5MPMAnRjx > bzv3dryAeKzfhnlmOdXK1UL2 > =9ogY > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 07:37:32 +0200 > From: ox <andre at ox.co.za> > To: Richard Clayton <richard at highwayman.com> > Cc: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net > Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7 > Message-ID: <mailman.406.1473140263.2752.anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 03:41:56 +0100 > Richard Clayton <richard at highwayman.com> wrote: > > In message , ox <andre at ox.co.za> writes > > >Dealing with your first point, I do agree and you are imho, quite > > >correct about the abuse from legacy resources. > > no -- I was concerned about abuse OF legacy resources :( > > >However, the current definition of Internet abuse is: --> use of a > > >resource to infringe upon the usage rights of another resource > > >So, this caters exactly for ALL resources, including legacy > > >resources... > > >Thank you for your feedback about, sanctioned, but it exists only to > > >reflect > > > > you've missed my point > > > I have not. > > > you define abuse as "non sanctioned" activity... that is, activity > > for which permission has not been granted. Fair enough (so far as it > > goes) > > > I do no such thing... > > > you then define "sanctioned" as being infringement :-( rather than > > setting out a definition which has something to do with the complexity > > of what permission means. > > > no, you are wrong again... > > Let me help you with it? > > Abuse core definition: - Read it :: s l o w l y > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------------------------- > use of a resource to infringe upon the usage rights of another resource > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------------------------- > > Then, read my previous reply, again? > > > Richard, > > Dealing with your first point, I do agree and you are imho, quite > correct about the abuse from legacy resources. > > However, the current definition of Internet abuse is: --> use of a > resource to infringe upon the usage rights of another resource > > So, this caters exactly for ALL resources, including legacy resources... > > Thank you for your feedback about, sanctioned, but it exists only to > reflect that when I, the owner of domain example.com "abuses" the > richard at example.com resource - by deleting richard@ (of course this > extends to RIR and other resources as well) > > In the case of 'sanctioned' as above, when a legacy resource user is > denied the use of that resource by new 'administrative holder' of > rights to that resource, that would then not be 'abuse' as such 'abuse' > would in fact be sanctioned. > > So, if you read it like that, do you agree that it is the right way > around and is correct? > > Thank you so much for contributing and helping > > Andre > > > On Sun, 4 Sep 2016 17:26:48 +0100 > Richard Clayton <richard at highwayman.com> wrote: > > >====================== > > >Definition of Internet abuse > > >====================== > > >"The non sanctioned use of a resource to infringe upon the usage > > >rights of another resource" > > >-------------------------------------------------------- > > >Terminology used in the above definition > > >-------------------------------------------------------- > > >(5) Sanctioned > > >Infringement upon the use of a resource by the assignor or > > >administrative holder of rights to a resource > > that definition of "sanctioned" is backwards from what you intend to > > say > > (not that I think it's a useful thing to say in such continuing > > isolation, but you might as well make it coherent) > > BTW: a considerable chunk of the problem, in practice, relates to > > abuse of "legacy" resources. The assignor is dead and the argument is > > made that there can be no administration of them ... > > > > > > > > > - -- > > richard Richard > > Clayton > > > > Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little > > temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin > > Franklin 11 Nov 1755 > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 > > > > iQA/AwUBV84s9Du8z1Kouez7EQI4KACgvPCyK4SimvypTL/bmW79vlB5MPMAnRjx > > bzv3dryAeKzfhnlmOdXK1UL2 > > =9ogY > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > > > > End of anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 11 > ********************************************* > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/ > attachments/20160913/7ef8c621/attachment.html> > > End of anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 14 > ********************************************* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20160916/ccef27ea/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] SPF Record - Number of included DNS lookups
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Need policy to require abuse contacts to accept abuse reports
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]