Is anyone else receiving spam from this organization? Based on the contents of the cold solicitations they are sending us, and the addresses being sent to, they have scraped ARIN WHOIS data for noc and abuse POC contact info and recent ipv4 block transfers.
It’s trivially easy to block their entire domain at the mail server level, of course…
Definitely have received this same spam multiple times and so have a few others I know. It’s ridiculous that they resort to scraping public lists and DBs to try and achieve what they’re attempting to do.
Our organization has also received cold contact emails from this company, and their unsubscribe link doesn’t appear to have slowed them down.
They now hit my junk folder.
John Stitt
HES Energynet
It’s ridiculous that they resort to scraping public lists and DBs to try and achieve what they’re attempting to do.
Everyone is always looking for information they can use to advance some agenda or purpose. The internet is fertile ground for that. Always has been, always will be.
Not taking shots at anyone here, but I am boggled why this is a common public complaint. Block the sender and move on.
Tom,
When an ARIN member violates their agreement and spams from ARIN’s databases, it’s not just an “Internet is fertile ground” deal. It’s a betrayal of a legal trust, one that demands accountability. I’m quite happy that ARIN promptly responds to these abuses, and gets results. That only works if victims report spam and compare notes. Let the “fertile ground” be elsewhere!
-mel beckman
Do we know if the organizations with key Internet resources (ARIN, RIPE, PeeringDB, etc.) have any honeypots in their arsenal? Obviously, publicly knowing about it kind of defeats the purpose of it, but that might be a way to help be proactive - make fake entries with unique contact information to catch those harvesting.
Sure. I have no issues ARIN handling what is reported to them.
That only works if victims report spam and compare notes.
I don’t agree with the ‘compare notes’ part. That’s ARIN’s job in the processing of reports.
Honestly Mike I don't think they care.
I mean, most (all ?) of the registries still can't be bothered to validate the information the resource holders post to the database. Last time I asked, e.g. RIPE about it, they basically said "not my problem guv" , pointed me to some policy document that said members should provide correct details and well, that was about it.
So if they don't do that, then what hope is there for them doing something about the harvesters ?
Laura,
just a couple of weeks ago, I reported and ARIN abuse here on NANOG, and ARIN responded immediately, contacting the offender and getting them to stop. The system works, and ARIN has the power to deter repeat offenders.
-mel
RIPE != ARIN
RIPE has a very lessez faire attitude towards network abuse and always has. It’s rather unfortunate.
ARIN, OTOH, has a clear understanding of their mandate, and they won’t pursue abuse outside of that mandate (e.g. general SPAM complaints, DDOS, etc.), but they will pursue complaints within their mandate pretty effectively (e.g. abuse of WHOIS data beyond the AUP, fraudulent address acquisition, incorrect WHOIS data, etc.)
YMMV.
Owen
* Laura Smith [Thu 12 Oct 2023, 19:01 CEST]:
I mean, most (all ?) of the registries still can't be bothered to validate the information the resource holders post to the database. Last time I asked, e.g. RIPE about it, they basically said "not my problem guv" , pointed me to some policy document that said members should provide correct details and well, that was about it.
So if they don't do that, then what hope is there for them doing something about the harvesters ?
RIPE have a policy that states members should submit correct contact details. Having spammers harvest the database discourages people from submitting correct contact details. Ergo, RIPE have a vested interest in ensuring the database doesn't get abused by spammers.
Literally everybody hates spam and spammers so it's an easy choice.
How an RIR would validate information, how often that should be done, and what would constitute valid information anyway is a very long discussion that has no bearing on abuse of said information.
-- Niels.
And yet, at least so far, RIPE refuses to take action on such reports, ergo, apparently they don’t really care as much as you say they should.
Owen
Which is exactly what I said Neils. When I asked about it, they pointed me at a policy.
Well hell, theoretically my company has a policy that describes zero-tolerance to spam. And yet if I published such a policy on the website, do you think spammers would adhere to it ?
As for you implying it is impossible for a RIR to validate such information, just ask anyone who is a Nominet (.uk registry) member.
Every year, Nominet do an audit of every member. They pull a random-sample of domains from each member and attempt to perform an automated check of end-user name and address details.
If Nominet are unable to perform the automated check, then you receive an email from the Nominet compliance department asking for your assistance with a manual check (this happens rarely, Nominet's automated checks normally work).
Nominet do not expect 100% perfection, there is a tolerance percentage.
RIPE could do the same. And some might argue that it is easier for RIPE because all we are asking is for a valid abuse contact, so its not like Nominet who have to verify e.g. registrant company ID numbers.
They do. In previous lives, I've regularly been on the receiving end of assorted audit requests from RIPE, some of which are to do with contact details in the DB (particularly when they find unreachable ones), and some of which are confirming that number resources are still in use by the organisation and for the purpose for which they were issued.
I think the original complaint was that RIPE don't act (or less so than ARIN) to block or otherwise deal with people who are mining the DB for contacts, despite that being an incentive to put "real" data in the DB - not than that they don't push for accurate data in the DB.
Thanks,
Tim.
To clarify, the original post from myself is more ARIN related and scraping of ARIN data. The incoming cold contacts from the ipv4-broker-spammer came to ARIN POCs for an ASN with presence only in the USA.
i received an arin board electioneering "vote for me" today. i guess
now i have to go vote against then.
randy
I’d vote for whoever promises to perma ban Cogent and all of these other clowns from access WHOIS data. Someone get on that!