Those numbers were subject to fraudulent acquisition. Some end users of these subject prefixes are victims. This blanket approach victimizes them further IMHO. My guess is this direction is why ARIN didn't post the prefixes in their blog post. They are however in the court docs. I don't recommend acting now. I could be wrong?

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 08:25 Anderson, Charles R <cra@wpi.edu> wrote:

What about these ones?

https://teamarin.net/2019/05/13/taking-a-hard-line-on-fraud/

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 01:43:30PM +0200, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> Hello
>
> This morning we apparently had a problem with our routers not handling
> the full table. So I am looking into culling the least useful prefixes
> from our tables. I can hardly be the first one to take on that kind of
> project, and I am wondering if there is a ready made prefix list or similar?
>
> Or maybe we have a list of worst offenders? I am looking for ASN that
> announces a lot of unnecessary /24 prefixes and which happens to be far
> away from us? I would filter those to something like /20 and then just
> have a default route to catch all.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Baldur