nanog mailing list archives
Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes
From: "Daniel Corbe" <dcorbe () hammerfiber com>
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2018 19:43:36 +0000
On 8/4/2018 01:04:17, "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuhnke () gmail com> wrote:
If you were setting up something new from a clean sheet of paper design - do you consider it appropriate to have an abuse role inbox that's dedicatedto actual network abuse issues (security problems, DDoS, IP hijacks,misbehavior of downstream customers, etc), and keep that separate from DMCAnotifications? Automated sorting tools *can* pull things which match regexes forautomatically-generated DMCA notifications out of an inbox and route themto the appropriate place.However, I'm pondering whether it's better to have an ISP's ARIN IP space whois entries state clearly that copyright violation type notices should goto a dedicated-purpose dmca@ispname inbox.
The main issue with the notion of keeping abuse@ separate from a dedicated DMCA takedown mailbox is companies like IP Echelon will just blindly E-mail whatever abuse POC is associated with either the AS record or whichever POCs are specifically associated with the NET block.
So it becomes kind of difficult to keep them routing to different places.
The guys doing the DMCA takedowns use automated tooling. So asking them nicely isn't going to help you.
Current thread:
- Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Eric Kuhnke (Aug 03)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Ross Tajvar (Aug 03)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Rich Kulawiec (Aug 04)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Daniel Corbe (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes nanog (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Jérôme Nicolle (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Michael Hallgren (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes nanog (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes John Levine (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Daniel Corbe (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes nusenu (Aug 08)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Rich Kulawiec (Aug 05)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Daniel Corbe (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes Jérôme Nicolle (Aug 06)
- Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes John Levine (Aug 06)