Hello fellow members, I will take the chance to also thank Angel for bringing this to our attention. It seems "regulation" is coming... I wonder if "BGP Hijacking" poses a risk to "the safety and rights of users or the rights of companies to compete in a fair market". I guess so, and I urge all that feel the same, to participate in this public consultation: hXXps://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12417-Digital-Services-Act-deepening-the-Internal-Market-and-clarifying-responsibilities-for-digital-services/public-consultation Wouldn't it be great if transit providers registered in the EU, or selling to EU companies, were obliged (regulated) to implement RPKI? Maybe we could even have the EU "add a routing regulator role to the RIPE NCC"! :) Regards, Marco De: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> Em nome de Brian Nisbet Enviada: 9 de julho de 2020 10:16 Para: Angel Fernandez Pineda <anfernandez@grupogodo.com>; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Assunto: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers Angel, Thank you for this, a very useful prompt! Brian Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 mailto:brian.nisbet@heanet.ie http://www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 ________________________________________ From: anti-abuse-wg <mailto:anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Angel Fernandez Pineda <mailto:anfernandez@grupogodo.com> Sent: Thursday 9 July 2020 08:16 To: mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net <mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe. Hi, I would like to make a recommendation to all of you. The EU has opened a consultation on the Digital Service Act, a future regulation that aims to review the role of digital platforms and technoly intermediaries and establish regulations to protect the rights of users and companies that operate online wherever is required. Of course, the role of ISPs or organizations like RIPE NCC can be subject to asses. The aim of the European Commission with the consultation is to identify situations that put at risk the safety and rights of users or the rights of companies to compete in a fair market. To those of you who know that this discussion, repeated so many times in this WG, will not reach to anything, I would like to invite you to dedicate a little of your time to answering the consultation. You will find it at: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fec.europa.eu%2Finfo%2Flaw%2Fbetter-regulation%2Fhave-your-say%2Finitiatives%2F12417-Digital-Services-Act-deepening-the-Internal-Market-and-clarifying-responsibilities-for-digital-services%2Fpublic-consultation&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7bf6cb706d5e48b22dc008d823d80370%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637298758391658981&sdata=LacRZpFsgQqCcAOQ%2Bzhu64d0ob463OO9IC7MJeXOAMQ%3D&reserved=0 Best, ángel Grupo Godó de Comunicación ________________________________________ De: anti-abuse-wg <mailto:anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> en nombre de Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg <mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> Enviado: jueves, 9 de julio de 2020 8:29 Para: mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net <mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> Asunto: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers Hi Info Maybe one of the reasons some Non-logging VPNs end up on blacklist sis that the Non-Looging phrase is just an excuse to not go after misuse. The rights to privacy and free speech do not mean anything goes. You can fight abuse without violating privacy. But of course that's not for free, you need abuse people that investigate and they cost money. Sadly, many of these VPNs frankly just don't care, using the lame excuse that they are protecting fundamental rights, when in fact they are just don't care or take responsibility. I don't agree with everything Spamhaus does, but I find them responsible and and always found a way way to talk to them. I was reluctant writing this, because I'm not sure this discussion will lead anywhere. It's one of these where opinions seem to already have been formed. But you start accusing people of posting anonymously. I totally agree this is bad, but then, who are you, mailto:info@fos-vpn.org? You don't seem to offer a name yourself. I find this a bit hypocritical. Best Serge On 08.07.20 20:46, mailto:info@fos-vpn.org wrote:
All I would like from Spamhaus is to stop publishing fake SBL records in order to discredit us and to use that to put pressure both upon us and our upstreams. Non-logging VPN services are as legal within the EU as Exit Nodes of the Tor Network (which have massive abuse entries in various data bases, especially the larger ones) and public WiFi Hotspots, which can be used for abusive activities, too.
I don't know who "PP" is (probably the same person which posts under the nickname "Petras Simeon" on Twitter and on various boards), but he contacted us and our upstream providers without telling his name, just using this email address: mailto:phishphucker@storey.ovh and sending us the list of SBL entries which he also posted here. Don't know if he's working for Spamhaus or not, but before attacking others publicly, people should reveal their true identity, anything else would be sneaky in my opinion.
-- Dr. Serge Droz Chair of the FIRST Board of Directors https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.first.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7bf6cb706d5e48b22dc008d823d80370%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637298758391658981&sdata=4n5ae2kX7r4qSW5BmJuMUKaHLTbetjhaeFodXh%2FLQb8%3D&reserved=0