- anti-abuse-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] where do i report fraudulent AS?
by Reza Farzan 18 Feb '13

18 Feb '13

Hello Kai, You may want to use this useful site, http://spamlinks.net/track-report-addresses.htm, first. There, you will find many links that may assist you. Reza Farzan ***** -----Original Message----- >From: kai <kai(a)rhynn.net> >Sent: Feb 15, 2013 2:13 PM >To: anti-abuse-wg(a)ripe.net >Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] where do i report fraudulent AS? > >Hello, > >where should I report fraudulent AS(Autonomous Systems), which are >announcing mainly cybercriminal hosting subnetworks? > >sorry if i'm posting to wrong maillist. > > >Cheers, > >Kai >

1 0

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] [ncc-services-wg] 2013-01 New Policy Proposal(Openness about Policy Violations)
by Jørgen Hovland 17 Feb '13

17 Feb '13

2 1

2013-01 New Policy Proposal (Openness about Policy Violations)
by Emilio Madaio 16 Feb '13

16 Feb '13

Dear Colleagues, A new RIPE Policy Proposal has been made and is now available for discussion. You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2013-01 We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <anti-abuse-wg(a)ripe.net> before 14 March 2013. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

3 4

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Reclamation/current policy (was: Re: Allocation of number resources)
by Athina Fragkouli 12 Feb '13

12 Feb '13

Dear colleagues, We would like to address the matter raised about the "Closure of Member and Deregistration of Internet Number Resources" procedural document (ripe-578), and in particular the following sections: - B.1.1.b Invalidity of original allocation/assignment criteria Internet number resources are allocated/assigned based on a specific need. When the original technical requirements or the business purpose for the use of the Internet number resources change, the allocation/ assignment becomes invalid. If the RIPE NCC notices any change in the original technical criteria or the original business purposes for using the Internet number resources, the RIPE NCC is authorised to deregister the relevant Internet number resources. - B.1.1.e Fraudulent request If a Member has submitted a fraudulent request for an allocation or an Independent resource (for example, by providing incorrect purpose/need or falsified information about the network, etc.), the RIPE NCC will deregister the relevant records. In section B.1.1.b "the RIPE NCC is authorised to deregister the relevant Internet number resources" whereas in section B.1.1.e "the RIPE NCC will deregister the relevant records". There is indeed a difference in the way we handle these two cases. Section B.1.1.b describes two cases: a) Assignments: Assignments are justified by a specific technical need. If the RIPE NCC finds that the original assignment criteria are no longer valid, we are authorised to deregister the assignment. In most cases when the original criteria are not longer valid, however, the reason is that the business of the end user has changed, and while the original criteria are no longer valid, there is still a valid technical need for address space. In such cases, we normally evaluate the "new" justification and update our records because deregistering one assignment while at the same time registering a new one is an unnecessary bureaucratic exercise. b) Allocations: Allocations never have a specific technical need as justification. An allocation is a block that is reserved for an LIR to make assignments out of. As such, the justification for an allocation is the business the LIR operates, which requires them to make assignments. Only when an LIR ceases to operate the business that requires it to make assignments would the allocation become invalid. But if the allocation is based on a fraudulent request (section B.1.1.e), this is clearly an offense. The RIPE NCC will certainly deregister the resources if there is evidence that the request was based on falsified information. Kind regards, Athina Fragkouli RIPE NCC > *From: *"Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg(a)tristatelogic.com > <mailto:rfg@tristatelogic.com>> > *Subject: **[anti-abuse-wg] Reclamation/current policy (was: Re: > Allocation of number resources)* > *Date: *February 9, 2013 9:33:24 PM GMT+01:00 > *To: *anti-abuse-wg(a)ripe.net <mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> > > > In message <5116686A.8020208(a)heanet.ie>, > Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie <mailto:brian.nisbet@heanet.ie>> > wrote: > >> Ronald F. Guilmette wrote, On 08/02/2013 20:07: >>> >>> It would appear that a newer revision of this document exists: >>> >>> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-541 >> >> Sorry, my mistake, I picked the wrong version. 541 has also been updated: >> >> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-578 >> >> Can you just check your questions still apply to this version? > > Yes, they still do apply. > > I would still like to know why Section B.1.b apparently says that RIPE > NCC _might_ reclaim the improperly allocated resources whereas Section > B.1.e says quite clearly that RIPE NCC "will" reclaim the resources. > > Again, my question is: Was this difference in wording intentional and > deliberate? Or was it inadvertant and unintended? > > > Regards, > rfg >

1 0

Fradulent Companies Obtaining Resources
by Ronald F. Guilmette 12 Feb '13

12 Feb '13

Given that I recently reported here a group of fradulent Romanian companies that had managed to obtain resources... for application to less-than-honorable goals... this recent news story seems both timely and apropos: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/05/digitally_signed_banking_trojan/

1 0

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Sony Copyright Infringement
by Reza Farzan 07 Feb '13

07 Feb '13

2 1

Sony Copyright Infringement
by Wayne Roberts 07 Feb '13

07 Feb '13

Sorry to say this but I don't believe it is the Sony corporation, Based on; The domain he's sending from, I understand that Sony may have outsourced their copy write claims but have you looked at "their" website? it's a little blank for a copywrite claim company. The records for the domain antipirates-in.com sounds to me more like somebody is trying to hide something, Not that I'm saying the privacy option is a bad thing. Also the wording he was using in his original Email "* including the powerful internationally functional **ic3.gov" *Since we are talking about India here the fbi have no jurisdiction. * * And again the wording* "**or else get ready to be sued for damages" *does not sound like the language a lawyer would use And again "*This is the legal department of (**Sony Music Entertainment India P.Ltd **)" *yet your email address is sony.claims(a)antipirates-in.com I think it's either somebody with a grudge against mp3khan.net or somebody is having a laugh !! But if I'm wrong ......... -- - Wayne Roberts

3 2

Copyright Infringement
by Wayne Roberts 07 Feb '13

07 Feb '13

Sorry to complain but drop the html formatted email's they look a complete mess. Do this and you might get our attention -- - Wayne Roberts

3 2

(no subject)
by Wayne Roberts 07 Feb '13

07 Feb '13

apologies -- - Wayne Roberts

1 0

Digital Certificates
by Wayne Roberts 07 Feb '13

07 Feb '13

Hi, I know this is the wrong place to ask such a question ,But i need some independent advice, what type of ssl cert do i need to secure IIS and Exchange? I had a quick chat with versign who quoted me over a thousand pounds !! -- - Wayne Roberts

2 1