North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Abuse response [Was: RE: Yahoo Mail Update]

  • From: Rich Kulawiec
  • Date: Tue Apr 15 08:44:18 2008

I largely concur with the points that Paul's making, and would
like to augment them with these:

- Automation is far less important than clue.  Attempting to compensate
for lack of a sufficient number of sufficiently-intelligent, experienced,
diligent staff with automation is a known-losing strategy, as anyone who
has ever dealt with an IVR system knows.

- Trustability is unrelated to size.  There are one-person operations
out there that are obviously far more trustable than huge ones.

- Don't built what you can't control.  Abuse handling needs to be
factored into service offerings and growth decisions, not blown off
and thereby forcibly delegated to the entire rest of the Internet.

- Poorly-desigged and poorly-run operations markedly increase the
workload for their own abuse desks.

- A nominally competent abuse desk handles reports quickly and efficiently.
A good abuse desk DOES NOT NEED all those reports because it already knows.
(For example, large email providers should have large numbers of spamtraps
scattered all over the 'net and should be using simple methods to correlate
what arrives at them to provide themselves with an early "heads up".  This
won't catch everything, of course, but it doesn't have to.)

---Rsk