[133252] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Abuse@ contacts
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Tue Dec 7 15:44:49 2010
In-Reply-To: <CD47955B7E065D48AB5CF226C2ED75C02E3A8E@tbs-sbs01.TBS.local>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 15:44:39 -0500
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: Gavin Pearce <Gavin.Pearce@3seven9.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Gavin Pearce <Gavin.Pearce@3seven9.com> wr=
ote:
> Hello,
>
>
>
> After a weekend of heavy spam last month, we decided to fire some
> reports over to the abuse contacts for each relevant IP or domain - some
> US/Europe based, others from more "obscure" locations.
>
>
>
> We've not had a reply from any of the reports sent over, other than some
> automated bounces. Each report from us contained detailed information
> about IP, date, headers, spam content, relevant ranges etc ...
>
>
>
> How many of you (honestly) actively manage and respond to abuse@ contact
> details listed in WHOIS? Or have had any luck with abuse@ contacts in
> the past? Who's good and who isn't?
lack or reply to abuse@ does not mean the box is unmonitored... just
that they don't feel it's helpful to reply to inbound mail with ..
more mail, especially when much of the inbound mail is automated.
> Apologies in advance if this has been around before - I'm new here. =A0 (=
:
sure.
-chris
