Re: [anti-abuse-wg] audit proposals

In message <CAArzuosEHQ6RYqnGwXWuCbGzuvqwEk9iH-tis948AcU00iL+fA@mail.gmail.com> Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com> wrote:

Entirely depends on the audit's conclusions.

1. Shell company in romania or the ukraine - "the documents say it is a registered company". Stop.

2. Hosting snowshoe spam or malware or whatever. "the justification just says "hosting". stop"

:)

I'm not grasping whatever point you were making Suresh. Can I ask you to please take another whack at it? Were you saying that the current audit NCC policies would in fact "stop" an audit (and declare everything acceptable?) upon learning that the target of the audit is merely a properly registered company? Regards, rfg