[anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02

The number of outright fake networks with shell company contacts might have something to do with that eastern european number :)

Or there's one or two outfits that can't make up their mind whether they are in the Netherlands, Dubai or Belize.

--srs

________________________________
From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of Thomas Hungenberg <th at cert-bund.de>
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 6:37 PM
To: Carlos Friaças
Cc: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02

On 19.02.19 13:23, Carlos Friaças wrote:
> Regarding the non-"DE" the figures are worse, right?

The statistics are based on our automated reports only.
Our automated system is sending 8,000+ reports per day - but only
addresses abuse contacts for networks registered with country code
"DE" directly. Data for networks registered with other country codes
is sent with aggregated reports to the respective national CSIRTs.

I don't have any statistics on bounces for reports manually sent
to abuse contacts for networks in other countries directly.

But yes, it looks like the number of invalid contacts for networks
in other countries is (much) higher, in particular for Eastern Europe.


- Thomas

CERT-Bund Incident Response & Malware Analysis Team


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20190219/a2923ddd/attachment.html>