[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Abuse Desks

A standard would be nice. In some of the auto-responders, I get requirements that conflict or are unreasonable. 

    * We don't accept abuse complaints via e-mail, please submit via this site: Yeah, okay. That's not scaleable. 
    * Network A wants time in GMT, while network B wants time in their local timezone. How do I know that ahead of time? Adjusting for that isn't scaleable 

Some are asking for my IP address. Okay, I get that if you have CGNAT running, you need to know that to check your logs. Now I gotta figure out how to get my IP address into the log. Many of the devices watched have more than one IP address. 

Having a standard would make generation of reports and processing of said reports a lot easier to automate. 

Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 


----- Original Message -----

From: sronan at ronan-online.com 
To: "NANOG" <nanog at nanog.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 10:25:19 AM 
Subject: Re: Abuse Desks 

Perhaps some organization of Network Operators should come up with an objective standard of what constitutes â??abuseâ?? 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/b998cc15/attachment.html>