nanog mailing list archives
Re: really amazon?
From: Denys Fedoryshchenko <nuclearcat () nuclearcat com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 23:22:29 +0300
On 2019-07-31 23:13, Scott Christopher wrote:
Valdis Klētnieks wrote:On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:36:08 -0000, Richard Williams via NANOG said: > To contact AWS SES about spam or abuse the correct email address is abuse () amazonaws comYou know that, and I know that, but why doesn't the person at AWS whose job itis to keep the ARIN info correct and up to date know that?Because it will get spammed if publicly listed in WHOIS.
They can send autoreply with correct address (even as picture, but yes, From: can be spoofed, so might be bad idea), make error message with link to captcha, custom error
in reject (e.g. web url to submit report), and etc. So many ways to be more helpful in such critical matters. But at least not "User not found".
Current thread:
- Re: User Unknown (WAS: really amazon?), (continued)
- Re: User Unknown (WAS: really amazon?) Steve Pointer (Jul 31)
- Re: User Unknown (WAS: really amazon?) Joe Provo (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Robert McKay (Jul 30)
- Not noreply autoresponder (WAS: really amazon?) Christoffer Hansen (Jul 30)
- 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? Landon Stewart (Jul 31)
- Re: really amazon? Stephen Satchell (Jul 31)