https://krebsonsecurity.com/2023/10/us-harbors-prolific-malicious-link-shortening-service/
"The NTIA recently published a proposal that would allow registrars to
redact all registrant data from WHOIS registration records for .US
domains. A broad array of industry groups have filed comments
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2023/10/tech-ceo-sentenced-to-5-years-in-ip-address-scheme/
And a statement from ARIN:
https://www.arin.net/blog/2023/10/16/micfo-golestan-sentencing/
On Mon, 14 Aug 2023, Masataka Ohta wrote:
Mike Hammett wrote:
" As such, the ultimate (a little expensive) solution is to have
your own Rb clocks locally."
Yeah, that's a reasonable course of action for most networks.
For most data centers with time sensitive transactions, at
So instead of applying a label, just drop the email outright.
-Dan
On Fri, 29 Jul 2022, Michael Thomas wrote:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4409/text?r=9=1
the body of the proposed law:
"(a) Conduct prohibited.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—It shall be unlawful for an
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, William Herrin wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 1:12 PM Sean Donelan wrote:
The FCC proposes $4,353,773.87 in total fines against 73 applicants in the
Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Phase I Auction (Auction 904) that
defaulted on their bids for support between July 26, 2021,
On Mon, 20 Jun 2022, Carsten Bormann wrote:
On 2022-06-20, at 14:14, J. Hellenthal wrote:
Yeah that's another thing, "research" cause you need to learn it let's have
them do it too, multiply that by every university \o/
there was some actual research involved.
I agree that there should be a
On Sun, 19 Jun 2022, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In earlier times, this was generally viewed as being distinctly anti-social
behavior, but perhaps attitudes have changed relative to earlier eras.
I would thus like to know how people feel about it now, in 2022.
This has not changed.
-Dan
On Sat, 28 May 2022, Jim Popovitch via NANOG wrote:
On Sat, 2022-05-28 at 11:36 -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
I am not in the ARIN region but I have attended few Arin meetings.
As a comment, I live a country were mobile roaming does not
exists,
therefore, when 2FA only works with SMS I can not
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 2/17/22 11:58 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-finds-two-providers-failed-fully-implement-stirshaken-0
The Federal Communications Commission today took action to ensure that
voice service providers meet their commitments
On Thu, 5 Aug 2021, Matt Corallo wrote:
Thus, lots of the large hosting providers have deemed the cost of
actually putting a human on an abuse contact is much too high.
it seems they have decided that ending up on DBL is their abuse
monitoring/reporting mechanism.
-Dan
On Fri, 9 Jul 2021, K. Scott Helms wrote:
Nothing will change immediately. Having said that, I do expect that we will
see much more effective enforcement. The investigations will come from the ITG
(Industry Traceback Group) with
enforcement coming from FCC or FTC depending on the actual
On Fri, 9 Jul 2021, Michael Thomas wrote:
Nothing has changed for me either. Color me surprised. The real proof will be
to see if the originating domain can be determined, and whether the receiving
domain does anything about it.
Why would they do anything? The traffic is revenue.
What is
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015, Seth Mattinen wrote:
I'm at the tail end here almost 8 hours later since the hijacking started.
Their NOC is just blowing me off now and they're happy to continue the
hijacking until it's convenient for them to have a maintenance window. And
that's apparently the final
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015, Larry Sheldon wrote:
On 7/28/2015 22:06, Bryan Tong wrote:
If anyone has any advice on how to deal with these people. Please let me
know here or off list.
Based on years of experience, the very best way is don't.
You have to work pretty hard to get a /17 listed.
Don't
supposedly vulnerable devices sailed through without a peep.
-Dan
On Wed, 1 Jul 2015, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Here's LWN's piece on the then-upcoming event from last week, presumably
with comments trailing into today.
http://lwn.net/Articles/648313/
How'd it go for everyone? Did the world
On Tue, 9 Jun 2015, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Shane Ronan sh...@ronan-online.com
When I was asked the default BGP timers across three different vendor
platforms as measure of my networking ability during an interview, I
replied saying I'd look them up if needed
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Bill Woodcock wrote:
Speaking individually, not with my ARIN board hat on:
If you???d like to report the address to ab...@arin.net, an ARIN postmaster can
contact the web.com POC, and get an authoritative answer.
Very interesting:
web.com/netsol is disavowing ownership of 209.17.115.109.
NetRange: 209.17.112.0 - 209.17.127.255
CIDR: 209.17.112.0/20
NetName:WEB-COM-BLK3
NetHandle: NET-209-17-112-0-1
Parent: NET209 (NET-209-0-0-0-0)
What is the process to get this netblock reclaimed?
i reported abuse to them that was originating directly from
209.17.115.109, they responded stating they have no control over the
origin IP and that i should look up the IP in arin to get the owner.
-Dan
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Mel Beckman wrote:
What makes you think they are disavowing
On Fri, 3 Apr 2015, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
We've been down this road before - we've had our own problems on this
side of the puddle with transit providers who refused to deal with problem
customers because the provider billed by the packet, and the customers were
good about paying their
On Mon, 6 Apr 2015, John Levine wrote:
In article pine.lnx.4.64.1504061101030.24...@sasami.anime.net you write:
On Fri, 3 Apr 2015, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
We've been down this road before - we've had our own problems on this
side of the puddle with transit providers who refused to deal
On Fri, 3 Apr 2015, Barry Shein wrote:
On April 2, 2015 at 14:19 goe...@anime.net (goe...@anime.net) wrote:
a number of years back i did have someone contact in chinese and the
response was that the customer was doing nothing wrong.
Ok, that's progress of a sort, what's the authoritative
On Thu, 2 Apr 2015, Mark Tinka wrote:
Most of the spam I get comes from North America. Go figure. I'm not
about to cut access to that continent off.
Big difference is that north america is usually responsive to abuse
notifications and sometimes has LEO who will listen.
china is neither.
emails to the registered contacts bounce, for one, undeliverable.
which is a bit of a change from the old chinanet auto-responder which
auto-responded to every email with
i cannot find that IP or that IP not by my Control. Please send the correct
IP.
a number of years back i did have
On Mon, 27 Oct 2014, Barry Shein wrote:
I disagree. Perhaps my age is showing, but I believe the whole point of the
registration database is to provide contact information to allow someone to contact the
registrant for whatever reason, e.g., hey, stop that!.
It's the old problem, crooks don't
On Mon, 27 Oct 2014, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
On 10/27/14 10:12 AM, goe...@anime.net wrote:
If you can't be bothered to have correct contact info, your packets go into
the scavenger queue. Or get redirected to a webpage explaining why your
network is blocked until you correct it.
Your
Can someone from peer1.net contact me?
You are filtering your ab...@peer1.net mailbox.
-Dan
On Fri, 10 Oct 2014, Tom Hill wrote:
On 10/10/14 19:01, Alistair Mackenzie wrote:
Gmail gave me a warning about this email too so that may be your problem.
Yeah, my provider classified it as spam too (which I think is a fairly
basic SpamAssassin installation).
nope.
peer1 is rejecting
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, Paul S. wrote:
It would appear you've done your part in trying to reach out (and
subsequently failed), so the next step to go is dropping all traffic from it.
Nothing wrong with trying to protect your own customer from people who cannot
be bothered to do their own due
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014, David Conrad wrote:
On Aug 10, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote:
It would be nice if allocations would be revoked due to invalid/fake contact
info.
That?s been debated many times, in most of the RIRs, and has not resulted in
any persistent policies
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Richard Bennett wrote:
This is one of the more clueless smears I've seen. The astroturf allegation
is hilarious because it shows a lack of understanding of what the term means:
individuals can't be astroturf by definition; it takes an organization.
Individuals can be paid
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
Cool story, however,
http://www.ashlandfiber.net/productcenter.aspx#residential
... is nothing to brag home about. 5Mbps uploads max? Meh, I get
more with mobile phone, plus my data is actually unlimited.
Consider that AFN was setup when
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
- the anti-muni laws hurt small localities the most, where none of the big
players have any intent of deploying anything
This is exacatly why ashland fiber network came to be. Because no provider
was willing to step up and provide service. So the
On Wed, 2 Jul 2014, Larry Sheldon wrote:
On 7/2/2014 1:00 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Jul 2, 2014, at 1:52 PM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
People will notice you streaking across a football field. They won't
pay the slightest attention to what you have to say but they sure will
notice
Looks like they've finally completely blocked off their abuse mailboxes.
- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
ab...@yahoo.fr
(reason: 554 Message not allowed - [298])
- Transcript of session follows -
... while talking to mx-eu.mail.am0.yahoodns.net.:
It's the content.
They're spamfiltering their abuse mailbox.
-Dan
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014, Blake Hudson wrote:
goe...@anime.net wrote the following on 6/11/2014 3:00 PM:
Looks like they've finally completely blocked off their abuse mailboxes.
- The following addresses had permanent
If there is anyone from linkedin.com abuse around please let me know. I've
been trying for 2 months to get an abuse issue resolved.
-Dan
If the carriers now get to play packet favoritism and pay-for-play, they
should lose common carrier protections.
-Dan
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, Keith Medcalf wrote:
I don't see this as a technical problem, but one of business and ethics.
ISP X advertises/sells customers up to 8Mbps (as an example), but when
it comes to delivering that product, they've only guaranteed 512Kbps (if
any) because the ISP hasn't put in
On Tue, 4 Feb 2014, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 10:09:02 -0800, Paul Ferguson said:
I'd like to echo Jared's sentiment here -- collectively speaking,
service providers need to figure out a way to deal with this issue,
before some congresscritters start to try to
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Sam Moats wrote:
The only thing I can think of is that they are making the decisions about how
important their abuse desk
is based solely on the cost of running that desk. They are seeing it as a
cost center and not thinking
about it's long term benefit to the entire
Can someone from rr.com please contact me. Your abuse desk seems to believe
this netblock does not belong to you:
network:Class-Name:network
network:ID:NETBLK-ISRC-24.39.128.0-17
network:Auth-Area:24.39.128.0/17
network:Org-Name:Road Runner Commercial
network:Tech-Contact:ipadd...@rr.com
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Otis L. Surratt, Jr. wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Ryan Pavely [mailto:para...@nac.net]
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 8:33 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ARIN WHOIS for leads
Even the anti-spam army out there seem to ignore 'This is the abuse
contact', and
cellphones with cameras are probably better for the purposes of covert
mass surveillance, especially ones with front facing cameras. far more of
them out there, and wireless to boot.
suprised everyone gets their panties in a bunch over presumed games
console monitoring, what about all your
On Thu, 6 Jun 2013, Matthew Petach wrote:
Much less stress in life that way. ^_^
complacency is always the easiest path.
many abuse@ mailboxes follow the same policy.
-Dan
On Mon, 3 Jun 2013, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
2. I have yet to see any evidence this century that Yahoo cares in
the slightest about the unceasing flood of spam/phish/abuse flowing
outbound from its operation. After all, if they did, we would not
be having this conversation.
wasn't yahoo's abuse
if anyone wondered why abuse goes unchecked, wonder no longer.
-Dan
On Mon, 6 May 2013, Warren Bailey wrote:
+1
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original message
From: Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com
Date: 05/06/2013 9:29 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: Valdis
And then you end up on RBLs. That seems to help the caring aspect PDQ.
-Dan
On Mon, 6 May 2013, Warren Bailey wrote:
Abuse is abuse.. People are going to do bad things, even when you call them
illegal (in some cases, as a result of calling them illegal). It's not illegal
to be a tool, but
On Thu, 28 Mar 2013, Jon Lewis wrote:
It's time for people to stop passing the buck on BCP38 (we don't do it,
because it really ought to be done at that other level) and start
implementing it where possible.
An economic factor will be required for BCP38 to be effective.
It will have to cost
On Fri, 30 Nov 2012, Naslund, Steve wrote:
My message to the cops and my lawyer would be charge me or lets clear
this up. There are laws to protect you from the government from taking
your stuff in an unfair manner if you want to go that route. If there
is a misunderstanding I will talk to the
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Sep 18, 2012, at 21:11 , Mike Hale eyeronic.des...@gmail.com wrote:
this is the arin vigilante cultural view of the world. luckily, the
disease does not propagate sufficiently to cross oceans.
I'd love to hear the reasoning for this. Why would it be
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message pine.lnx.4.64.1209182339200.5...@sasami.anime.net, goe...@anime.ne
t writes:
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Sep 18, 2012, at 21:11 , Mike Hale eyeronic.des...@gmail.com wrote:
this is the arin vigilante cultural view of the
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, George Herbert wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:25 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012 17:11:49 -0500, Grant Ridder said:
I love spam from Honduras. I am hoping that someone is going to kick this
email from the members list.
I'm hoping for something a
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
William Herrin wrote:
This is, incidentally, is a detail I'd love for one of the candidates
to offer in response to that question. Bonus points if you discuss MSS
clamping and RFC 4821.
The less precise answer, path MTU discovery breaks, is just fine.
On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, Nick Hilliard wrote:
On 06/07/2012 16:12, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 17:42:42 +1000, Matthew Palmer said:
Ugh, I know someone (thankfully no longer a current colleague) who ardently
*defends* his use of questions like what does the -M option to ps
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Scott Weeks wrote:
This is not a question of willful rejection,ISPs are happy to do this. They're
just lazy...It doesn't have a direct impact on them and their ability to get new address space
because they don't need new address space.
Yep, we're definitely the lazy ones.
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Scott Weeks wrote:
--- goe...@anime.net wrote:
or you can fix the problem that has been festering for 10+ years.
---
Yeah, that. Why make it seem that v6 is the problem when it isn't.
if arin would clamp down and revoke allocations that
fix your mail filters and maybe someone might be able to respond to you.
- Transcript of session follows -
... while talking to smtp.cidc.net.:
DATA
550 5.7.1 Rejected (100.00) - Retry with Cc: ab...@b2b2c.ca for analysis
554 5.0.0 Service unavailable
-Dan
On Tue, 15 May 2012,
The day SORBS goes away is the day ab...@yahoo.com starts functioning
properly and yahoo starts booting spammers.
The day SORBS goes away is the day BS like this stops happening:
- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
ab...@noc.privatedns.com
(reason: 554 rejected
the yahoo item was a point all its own, unrelated to iweb's idiocy.
yahoo no longer care to receive abuse reports from anyone at all.
-Dan
On Sat, 7 Apr 2012, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
err, i dont know but yahoo hasnt yet acquired this random webhost whose
abuse you're trying to mail
On
This is often the only way to get peoples attention and get action.
Providers dont care about individual /32's and will let them sit around
and spew nigerian scams and pill spams without any consequences.
But they will care about a /24.
-Dan
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Drew Weaver wrote:
Now, if
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012, David Conrad wrote:
Actually, given the uptick in spoofing-based DoS attacks, the ease in
which such attacks can be generated, recent high profile targets of said
attacks, and the full-on money pumping freakout about anything with
cyber- tacked on the front, I suspect a
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012, Bingyang LIU wrote:
the provider may not be able to protect its customers, because ingress
filtering (including uRPF) is inefficient when done near the
destination. In other words, an ISP can deploy BCP38 or whatever, but
still cannot well protect its customers from spoofing
vague question gets vague answer.
yes
-Dan
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Maverick wrote:
Is there a whitelist that applications have to talk to in order to
update themselves?
Anyone have a clueful road runner contact?
-Dan
ab...@rr.com doesn't seem to think so.
-Dan
So anyone have a roadrunner contact with some clue?
-Dan
On Sat, 3 Mar 2012, Alex Conner wrote:
According to Whois that's a commercial roadrunner connection, and it falls in
one of their netblocks.
Plenty of info here: http://bgp.he.net/ip/74.218.84.10
goe...@anime.net
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Steven Bellovin wrote:
Sure; I don't disagree, and I don't think that Randy does. But just
because we can't solve the whole problem, does that mean we shouldn't
solve any of it?
that is often the way things are argued in engineering circles.
the solution is imperfect
On Mon, 6 Feb 2012, Christopher Morrow wrote:
why aren't filters applied at all?
filters don't generate revenue.
-Dan
On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Jimmy Hess wrote:
What the internet really needs is Tier1 and Tier2 providers participating
in the internet who care, regardless of the popularity or size of
netblocks or issues involved. And by care, I mean, providers
efficiently investigating reports of hijacking or
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012, Joe Provo wrote:
The suits won, and many nerds either threw in with them or revealed
their affinity for the easy life and gave up. Being principled and
turning away dirty money or exercising the fire the customer clause
tends to be disliked by corporate officers.
bottom
I think the correct term for this is bullet proof hosting. Now you know
where to go.
-Dan
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Kelvin Williams wrote:
I hope none of you ever get hijacked by a spammer housed at Phoenix NAP. :)
We're still not out of the woods, announcing /24s and working with upper
tier
On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Mark Andrews wrote:
And if I have a contract to commit murder that doesn't mean that
it is right nor legal. A contract can't get you out of dealing
with the law of the land and in most place in the world aiding and
abetting is illegal.
the topic at hand would appear to be
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011, Don Gould wrote:
Anyone with any clue on how to contact ab...@brasiltelecom.com.br like to
forward this? Their abuse contact in the whois database is just bouncing.
I think most sane operators totally blocked brasiltelecom ages ago.
I would like to see the community
Anyone with contacts at aster.pl advise them of their unwise policies?
Thanks.
-Dan
From: Abuse ASTER ab...@aster.pl
===
This email was send automatically !
Do not reply to this email.
---
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote:
as a european provider, we have no liability whatsoever for what customers
do or do not do
about the best reason i can think of for listing this block until the heat
death of the universe.
-Dan
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, John Peach wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 17:17:30 -0700 (PDT) goe...@anime.net wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote:
as a european provider, we have no liability whatsoever for what customers
do or do not do
about the best reason i can think of for listing
On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, Alexander Maassen wrote:
Why o why are isp's and hosters so ignorant in dealing with such issues
and act like they do not care?
they don't act like they do not care. they really *don't* care. no acting.
1) you're not a direct customer, why should they do anything? by
On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, Jeff Wheeler wrote:
So ultimately, there is already a good framework in place to
substantially fix this problem. No one uses it. That is unlikely
to change until there is an economic incentive, such as a lawsuit by
someone targeted by DoS which can be proven to be
On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, Alexander Maassen wrote:
On 13-3-2011 18:31, William Allen Simpson wrote:
On 3/13/11 7:45 AM, Alexander Maassen wrote:
Why o why are isp's and hosters so ignorant in dealing with such issues
and act like they do not care?
So, part of the problem is *your* upstream. Why
On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, Leo Bicknell wrote:
Quite frankly, most ISP's aren't going to take your DDOS report
seriously via e-mail. If it's not bad enough to you that it is
worth your time and money to make a phone call and help them track
it down it is not worth their time and money to track it
Is there a process to revoke netblocks from entities which deny ownership?
http://www.db.ripe.net/whois?searchtext=77.223.129.43
The admin-c, tech-c deny any responsibility for this netblock.
-Dan
Anyone have a WORKING abuse contact for lstn.net / limestonenetworks.com?
I have tried the usual channels (ab...@limestonenetworks.com, phone calls, live
chat) with no results.
-Dan
Yearly? I say every 30 days.
mailing lists do the c-r every 30 days. surely correct arin registration
data is more important than a single email address on a mailing list.
-Dan
On Fri, 1 Oct 2010, Franck Martin wrote:
A yearly challenge response for legacy space contacts, could be useful.
On Fri, 9 Apr 2010, George Bonser wrote:
I suppose it is easier and takes less of your resources to get the world
to block you than it is to block the world.
operating a bullet proof spam network, ignoring complaints, is
certainly one way to achieve that.
anyone remember chinanet's lying
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, Danny McPherson wrote:
FWIW, this is a lot like putting a bandaid on a headache - it's not going
to do much good in reality, and likely cause more harm than good in properly
secured networks - but it might make some folks feel a little better.
behavior modification.
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010, Jay Hennigan wrote:
Mark Tinka wrote:
not usually my style to whine, but...
ATT, what gives?
/not usually my style to whine, but...
You need the proper perspective on these things. Rent and watch this classic
movie from 1967, then you'll understand.
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, James Hess wrote:
Spam filter your inbox on /CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE.*intended
recipient.*destroy.*copies/siand be done with it.The
individual sender normally has no control over the matter, so their
only two choices are: (a) Post with the notice, or (b) Don't post
Anyone have a clueful mail admin contact for tpg.com.au?
The usual attempts result in completely clueless and unhelpful responses,
going round in circles with no progress.
-Dan
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Drew Weaverdrew.wea...@thenap.com wrote:
Anyone know why SAAVIS would be allowing PEER1 (AS 13768) to advertise routes
for whatever IP addresses they want?
sadly savvis didn't learn the pccw lesson, which is also
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Luke S Crawford wrote:
goe...@anime.net writes:
On Fri, 8 Aug 2009, Luke S Crawford wrote:
1. are there people who apply pressure to ISPs to get them to shut down
botnets, like maps did for spam?
sadly no.
...
Why do you think this might be? Fear of (extralegal)
On Fri, 8 Aug 2009, Luke S Crawford wrote:
1. are there people who apply pressure to ISPs to get them to shut down
botnets, like maps did for spam?
sadly no.
I've got 50 gigs of packet captures, and have been going through with
perl to detect IPs who send me lots of tcp packets with 0
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009, William Pitcock wrote:
On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 20:05 -0700, Shon Elliott wrote:
There has been alot of customers on our network who were complaining about ACK
scan reports coming from 207.126.64.181. We had no choice but to block that
single IP until the attacks let up. It
On Thu, 24 Jul 2009, John Levine wrote:
ab...@btopenworld.com
I'm not sure which is worse:
1) That they filter their abuse mailbox.
2) That they outsource their abuse mailbox (and potentially others) to Yahoo.
BT outsources all of their mail to Yahoo. It actually works pretty well,
either POP
http://status.4chan.org/
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, jamie wrote:
No ears enclosing clue will be reached via normal channels at ~950E on a
Sunday, but this is clearly a problem needing addressing, resolution, action
and, who knows - suit?
http://www.hulu.com/watch/4163/saturday-night-live-ernestine
Seems rather unwise to filter your abuse mailbox.
- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
ab...@btopenworld.com
(reason: 554 Message not allowed - UP Email not accepted for policy
reasons. Please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-04.html
[120])
assume i have already done this, and received a completely and utterly
useless response from yahoo indicating they have absolutely not the
slightest clue.
-Dan
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, Ben Carleton wrote:
Try filling out this form to reach Y's abuse dept?
On Wed, 6 May 2009, Jeremy L. Gaddis wrote:
With regard to the recent discussion...
Late last month the Minnesota Department of Public Safety announced
it would require ISPs and telcos to block computers located in the
state from accessing gambling sites, and said non-compliant companies
would
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
At 08:18 AM 18-03-09 +0100, Henk Uijterwaal wrote:
It's a bit dated now, but the RIPE report, ASN MIA, sounds like what
you're looking for...
www.apnic.net/meetings/21/docs/sigs/routing/routing-pres-uijterwaal-asn-mia.ppt
When I look at this more
Can a yahoo mail admin with clue pleae contact me? I'm going around in
circles with your support staff who are unable to read headers.
-Dan
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
