[anti-abuse-wg] 2017-02 Review Phase Reminder

On 20/02/2018 01:06, Name wrote:
> Making sure admins have a functioning abuse email address has nothing to
> do with security theater.

My understanding of the term "security theater" is

 "Unnecessary and sometimes expensive inconveniences introduced to
demonstrate that 'something is being done' to address (usually
legitimate) security threats, when the measures introduced have no
material effect in mitigate the threat in question".

It has been asserted that making sure admins have a functioning abuse
e-mail address will help combat abuse, but nobody has managed to explain
how in a way that I can understand. As far as I can see, this will
achieve nothing useful.

I have developed three possible conclusions:

1. This is just security theatre, according to the above definition.

2. There is an important reason for doing this, but the proponents are
unwilling to discuss it openly and clearly. Perhaps some might hope that
abusive users will initially fall foul of this rule, and arbitrarily
selective and aggressive enforcement would provide a quick and easy
route to de-allocate IP address allocations to those users.

3. I am simply too stupid to understand this simple issue.

If there is a fourth, or if someone can explain how making people set up
an autoresponder that nobody reads is useful, then I would like to hear it.

Malcolm.

-- 
            Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523
   Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog
 London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/

                 London Internet Exchange Ltd
           Monument Place, 24 Monument Street London EC3R 8AJ

         Company Registered in England No. 3137929
       Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA