First of: Congrats and thank you Ronald for this work. What makes me a bit sad is, that posting this here immediately starts a discussion about what is expected behavior on these lists, rather than how we could combat abuse more efficiently. It seems a seeminglu, to me at least, humorous remark, sparks more discussion than the troubling fact that criminals have the time of their lives during this period of time. I'm all in favor of staying civil on public fora. But noting in the original post was not civil. I am wondering what the we want to achieve here on the anti-abuse list? Call me stupid, but I just don't get it. Best Serge On 01.12.20 22:48, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <DB7PR06MB501791137C12E71EA525C7DD94F40@DB7PR06MB5017.eurprd06.prod. outlook.com>, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet@heanet.ie> wrote:
However I suspect that X-posting to a list like apnic-talk may not be the wisest idea, given the different populations etc...
It is among my fondest hopes that cybercriminals of all stripes, and particularly the ones who squat on IPv4 space that doesn't belong to them, will, in future, show more respect for regional boundaries, such that their devious activities will only oblige me to notify the members of a single one of the five RIR regions regarding any single one of these elaborate criminal schemes. Alas, in this instance however, the perpetrators, in a very unsportsmanlike manner, elected to make messes whose roots were found in both the RIPE region and also in the APNIC region. (And that's not even to mention that most of the squatted IPv4 real estate was and is under the administration of the ARIN region.)
Clearly, authorities in all five regions should be devoting somewhat more effort towards the cultivation of a better and more respectful class of cybercriminals who will confine their convoluted schemes to their own home regions.
Regards, rfg
-- Dr. Serge Droz Chair of the FIRST Board of Directors https://www.first.org