A standard would be nice. In some of the auto-responders, I get requirements that conflict or are unreasonable.


Some are asking for my IP address. Okay, I get that if you have CGNAT running, you need to know that to check your logs. Now I gotta figure out how to get my IP address into the log. Many of the devices watched have more than one IP address.


Having a standard would make generation of reports and processing of said reports a lot easier to automate.



-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com


From: sronan@ronan-online.com
To: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 10:25:19 AM
Subject: Re: Abuse Desks

Perhaps some organization of Network Operators should come up with an objective standard of what constitutes “abuse” and a standard format for reporting it.

If only there was such an organization.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 29, 2020, at 11:14 AM, Chris Adams <cma@cmadams.net> wrote:
>
> Once upon a time, Mukund Sivaraman <muks@mukund.org> said:
>> If an abuse report is incorrect, then it is fair to complain.
>
> The thing is: are 3 failed SSH logins from an IP legitimately "abuse"?
>
> I've typoed IP/FQDN before and gotten an SSH response, and taken several
> tries before I realized my error.  Did I actually "abuse" someone's
> server?  I didn't get in, and it's hard to say that the server resources
> I used with a few failed tries were anything more than negligible.
>
> I've had users tripped up by fail2ban because they were trying to access
> a server they don't use often and took several tries to get the password
> right or had the wrong SSH key.  Should that have triggered an abuse
> email?
>
> --
> Chris Adams <cma@cmadams.net>