nanog mailing list archives
Re: really amazon?
From: "Scott Christopher" <sc () ottie org>
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 00:54:07 +0300
Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 11:13:48PM +0300, Scott Christopher wrote:Because it will get spammed if publicly listed in WHOIS.Yes. It will. Are you telling us that Amazon, with its enormous financial and personnel resources, doesn't have ANYBODY on staff who knows how to properly manage an abuse@ address -- part of which includes dealing with that exact problem?
They do, but it's just time-consuming and inefficient. You can't spam-filter the content of abuse@ obviously. But in addition to spam, random (read: non-technical) people will send complaints outside of the usual purview of spam, network abuse, DMCA, etc. They find some FAQ on the web telling them to determine the PoC on whois.domaintools.com and then they start firing crap. I prefer openness and transparency and the general spirit of WHOIS but, in practice, you really do need the limit the PoC information to a trusted group of insiders. -- S.C.
Current thread:
- Re: really amazon?, (continued)
- Re: really amazon? Christoffer Hansen (Jul 30)
- Re: really amazon? Jay R. Ashworth (Jul 30)
- Re: really amazon? Rich Kulawiec (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Richard Williams via NANOG (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Valdis Klētnieks (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Scott Christopher (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Denys Fedoryshchenko (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Brian J. Murrell (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Stephen Satchell (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Rich Kulawiec (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Scott Christopher (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Rich Kulawiec (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Richard Williams via NANOG (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Christoffer Hansen (Jul 30)
- Re: really amazon? Landon Stewart (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Stephen Satchell (Jul 31)