-----Original Message----- From: anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:anti-abuse-wg- bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Suresh Ramasubramanian Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 5:24 AM To: rezaf@mindspring.com Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Of course. But as they are careful enough to inform people
On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com> wrote: through
their whois that they will reject reports going to these other addresses ..
This is amazing. So reza had cc'd hostmaster@chello.at in his email - and I hit reply all. Now - it seems they don't seem to accept email at their hostmaster address either.
Original-Recipient: RFC822;<hostmaster@chello.at> Final-Recipient: RFC822; <hostmaster@chello.at> Action: failed Status: 4.4.7 Remote-MTA: dns; surf0n.vienna.chello.at X-Actual-Recipient: RFC822; <hostmaster@surf0n.vienna.chello.at>
Having a working abuse address is but a technicality. All mail sent to the address could still be handled by Mr Null. Another possible approach is this one: Final-Recipient: RFC822; abuse@romtelecom.ro Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Remote-MTA: DNS; it11.romtelecom.ro Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 554 rejected due to spam content Last-Attempt-Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 18:07:50 +0300 Even if the RIPE NCC would check abuse addresses by sending some kind of challenges, those messages might not trigger the spam filter of the Romanians, instead returning an OK result. Black hat providers will always ignore abuse reports (or use them to improve their spam lists), so having an abuse address that works on the SMTP level is just a beginning, useless on its own. -- Thor Kottelin http://www.anta.net/