Abuse Desks

Wed Apr 29 15:42:02 UTC 2020

The standards are perfectly feasible.

That doesn't mean people will follow them, however it's much better to say
"I ignored your notification because it didn't follow the objective
standard" then it is to just say "I ignored your notification because I
felt like it"

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020, 11:37 AM Mel Beckman <mel at beckman.org> wrote:

> SRonan,
>
> If only such a standard were feasible :)
>
>  -mel beckman
>
> > On Apr 29, 2020, at 8:25 AM, "sronan at ronan-online.com" <
> sronan at ronan-online.com> wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps some organization of Network Operators should come up with an
> objective standard of what constitutes “abuse” and a standard format for
> reporting it.
> >
> > If only there was such an organization.
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> On Apr 29, 2020, at 11:14 AM, Chris Adams <cma at cmadams.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Once upon a time, Mukund Sivaraman <muks at mukund.org> said:
> >>> If an abuse report is incorrect, then it is fair to complain.
> >>
> >> The thing is: are 3 failed SSH logins from an IP legitimately "abuse"?
> >>
> >> I've typoed IP/FQDN before and gotten an SSH response, and taken several
> >> tries before I realized my error.  Did I actually "abuse" someone's
> >> server?  I didn't get in, and it's hard to say that the server resources
> >> I used with a few failed tries were anything more than negligible.
> >>
> >> I've had users tripped up by fail2ban because they were trying to access
> >> a server they don't use often and took several tries to get the password
> >> right or had the wrong SSH key.  Should that have triggered an abuse
> >> email?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Chris Adams <cma at cmadams.net>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20200429/1d119db8/attachment.html>