[anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
peter h
peter at hk.ipsec.se
Tue Feb 19 17:37:20 CET 2019
Hej Thomas, du skrev inte vilka partners som kan erbjuda slaves. Förr ringde/mailade jag staff at swip.net och fick alltid hjälp. Kan ha berott på att volvo var en av deras första kunder :-) Jag har hittat clodns, och testar med dem. Har du några synpunkter på dem ? De svenska ISP jag talat med verkar helt ointresserade om de inte får gör allt. Då skickar jag hellre mina pengar till bulgarien. Mvh peter h On Tuesday 19 February 2019 14.06, Thomas Hungenberg wrote: > 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 > > > -- Peter Håkanson There's never money to do it right, but always money to do it again ... and again ... and again ... and again. ( Det är billigare att göra rätt. Det är dyrt att laga fel. )
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]