This is more in the line with the one that I submitted in other regions (coming also for RIPE, I think this week or next one), that has been already accepted (being implemented) by APNIC:

https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-125

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] Verification of abuse contact addresses ?
From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com>
Date: Tue, March 05, 2019 8:55 am
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net


Sorry folks, when this topic was discussed, I confess that I wasn't
really paying much attention. So now I am forced to ask: Was someone
going to verify the abuse contact addresses listed in the RIPE WHOIS
data base?

If so, how is that project coming along?

I'll tell you why I ask. It's quite simple really. Some jerk, probably
Mexican, just sent me a spam wherein he was advertising for sale his
list of 18 million "business" email addreses. (I can't quite tell if
those are all supposed to be specifically Mexican email addrses or what...
because the spam was written in Spanish, and I don't speak Spanish.)

https://pastebin.com/raw/dT11krpN

Note that the specific email address of mine that was spammed was one that
I only used in ancient times, and only in conjunction with my activities
on one specific web site. (It obviously leaked somehow.)

The envelope sender address was forged to be my own.

The source IP was 109.68.33.19 as you can see. So naturally, I performed
a RIPE WHOIS query on that IP address and the results I got back indicated
that the contact email address for spam reports was <abuse@meshdigital.com>.
So I emailed off a report to that address.

Of course, it bounced back to me immediately as undeliverable.

This causes me to suspect that either (a) that stuff that I thought that
I has seen previously about a project to verify abuse addresses was all
just a bunch of malarkey, or else (b) that project is still unfinished
and perhaps not going all that well.

Could someone please enlighten me and tell me which possibility actually
applies?


Regards,
rfg


P.s. It is annoying enough to have to lookup who the bleep should
receive a report about spamming from their network _and_ to have to
even write such reports, when 9 time sout of ten, the sending network
could have easly prevented the spam from even going out. It is just
adding insult to injury when the bloody "official" abuse reporting
address doesn't even actually exist.

And of course, neither meshdigital.com nor meshdigital.net even have
functioning web sites.

Apparently this is all the work of some dolts at a company called heg.com,
in Germany. Do any of you happen to know any of the clueless nitwits
who work there? If so, maybe you could put me in direct touch so that
I could personally apply a much needed clue-by-four.