On 4/13/20 07:25, Kushal R. wrote:
From the past few months we have been receiving a constant stream of
abuse reports from a company that calls themselves RiskIQ (RiskIQ.com).
The problem isn’t the abuse reports themselves but the way they send
them. We receive copies of the report, on our sa
On 2020-04-18, at 03:08, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>
> 24x7x365 thus means every hour of 7 years. YES, I know, I know.
Clearly, it means the NOC only operates in the seven years of great abundance
that precede the seven years of famine (Genesis 41:29 etc.). I think I have
seen such NOCs before :-
Rich. I am truly sorry. 💖 also this was great thank you.
-Ben
> On Apr 17, 2020, at 6:09 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>
> (since it's Friday and we're all stressed)
>
> I can't believe that out of everything I wrote that we're going to discuss
> the semantics of this, but then again: yes I can.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:09 PM Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> 24x7 means every hour of the week, as in "24 by 7".
>
> 24x365 means every hour of the year. (modulo those with 366 days
> but please let's not go there because this is bad enough)
> (oh wait, too late, someone upthread already
(since it's Friday and we're all stressed)
I can't believe that out of everything I wrote that we're going to discuss
the semantics of this, but then again: yes I can. I should have known.
I should have known. I. Should. Have. Known. *bangs head on desk*
*reaches for scotch* Alrighty then:
24
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:33:58PM -0400, Ross Tajvar wrote:
> Can you give some examples of the things you mention above? I'm not doing
> much in terms of customer filtering and would be interested to hear what
> others consider best practice.
Sure. These are just examples and are by no means ex
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 3:07 AM Forrest Christian (List Account)
wrote:
> If you're going for accuracy, does 24x365 mean you close one day this year?
> Or should you actually be saying 24x365.25, or even more accurately
> 24x365.2425 (but still not exact).
How can you be that pedantic and not
What?
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 2:48 PM Bryan Fields wrote:
>
> On 4/16/20 4:48 PM, Ben Cannon wrote:
> > Side note: What you describe is in-fact part of how languages change and
> > evolve. (over time, sufficiently common incorrect use becomes. well.
> > correct.)
>
> Top posting will never be
On 4/16/20 4:48 PM, Ben Cannon wrote:
> Side note: What you describe is in-fact part of how languages change and
> evolve. (over time, sufficiently common incorrect use becomes. well.
> correct.)
Top posting will never be correct, even if the entire world does it.
:-)
--
Bryan Fields
727-409
Honestly, sometimes I include the "Three-Hundred Sixty-Five and a Quarter” on
conference calls.
Side note: What you describe is in-fact part of how languages change and
evolve. (over time, sufficiently common incorrect use becomes. well. correct.)
-Ben Cannon
CEO 6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LL
On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 22:06:52 -0700, Ben Cannon said:
> I call our NOC â24x7x365â I hear that in my head as âtwenty-four
> (hour) - BY
> - Seven (days a week) - BY - 365 (days a year, indicating we donât close on
> any holidays).
x365 is fine, to distinguish from 24x7x360 operations tha
At a previous employer much earlier in my career, we inherited some simple
webhosting from a company acquisition. In one of the early meetings we had
about integrating it, someone from our support team asked some questions
about the abuse report procedures, etc. Our owner came straight out and
said
Sorry I can't resist...
If you're going for accuracy, does 24x365 mean you close one day this
year? Or should you actually be saying 24x365.25, or even more accurately
24x365.2425 (but still not exact).
Oh wait, we missed the leap seconds in there, which there isn't any real
way to average out
24x7 is way more common, but does leave ambiguity as to holiday coverage.
(there are some 24x7 businesses that close for holidays).
24x7x365 is on the rise as a way to specify that you’re open holidays too.
End of the day, I’m not sure it matters which one you use.
Likely any Google search for
No. 24x7x365 is fine. Sheesh.
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020, 10:10 PM Ben Cannon wrote:
> So I’m taking this thread for a total test-drive and we’re going down this
> random ally...
>
> I call our NOC “24x7x365” I hear that in my head as “twenty-four (hour) -
> BY - Seven (days a week) - BY - 365 (day
Ha!
The first warning sign would be where they discuss your AUP and
exceptions / corner cases to it
Or
'we just need a /24, we are doing e-mail services and we can assure
you its all good'
...
Bye, Raymond
On 4/15/20 11:33 PM, Ross Tajvar wrote:
Can you give some examples of the things you mention above? I'm not
doing much in terms of customer filtering and would be interested to
hear what others consider best practice.
My experience is that there's two groups of customers that are
problematic
So I’m taking this thread for a total test-drive and we’re going down this
random ally...
I call our NOC “24x7x365” I hear that in my head as “twenty-four (hour) - BY -
Seven (days a week) - BY - 365 (days a year, indicating we don’t close on any
holidays).
Is that really not a thing? I swea
We’ve got a 24/7 NOC and respond to abuse reports in either real-time in as
close to real-time as we can, I’d send another message if it went 24 hours
without a reply too. We also have a ticket system that replies immediately so
they know the e-mail went through, and we track it like a real comp
t: Re: Constant Abuse Reports / Borderline Spamming from RiskIQ
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 8:52 AM Rich Kulawiec
mailto:r...@gsp.org>> wrote:
there are
all kinds of things that can be done to detect problematic customers
before you sign them up and once they're in place.
Hey Rich,
Can you gi
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 8:52 AM Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> there are
> all kinds of things that can be done to detect problematic customers
> before you sign them up and once they're in place.
>
Hey Rich,
Can you give some examples of the things you mention above? I'm not doing
much in terms of cu
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 12:11:44PM -0700, Matt Corallo via NANOG wrote:
> I don???t really get the point of bothering, then. AWS takes about
> ~forever to respond to SES phishing reports, let alone hosting abuse,
> and other, cheaper, hosts/mailers (OVH etc come up all the time) don???t
> bother at
[ Copied to Jonathan @ RiskIQ because I don't believed he's subscribed. ]
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:14:11PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> All abuse reports that we receive are dealt within 48 business
> hours. As far as that tweet is concerned, it???s pending for 16 days
> because they have been blo
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 18:14 Matt Palmer wrote:
> [Hideously mangled quoting fixed]
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 02:51:55PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> > Matt Palmer wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:14:11PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> > > > All abuse reports that we receive are dealt within 48 b
[Hideously mangled quoting fixed]
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 02:51:55PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> Matt Palmer wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:14:11PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> > > All abuse reports that we receive are dealt within 48 business hours.
> >
> > At eight business hours per calendar
Jonathan-
First time posts to the list are , pardon the phrase, quarantined out of
the gate. Once it's obvious that it's not spam or a problem individual,
that gets released and future messages go straight out.
This is still a manual process done by one person in the NANOG
organization, so it's n
I’ll reaching out to you off list.
>
> On Apr 14, 2020 at 1:55 PM, mailto:jonatha...@riskiq.net)>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> My bad - This was not for Rich but for Kushal who initiated the thread taking
> the survey about us being "spammers". I'm contactin
We are a 24x7 operation.
>
> On Apr 14, 2020 at 12:20 PM, mailto:mpal...@hezmatt.org)>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:14:11PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote: > All abuse
> reports that we receive are dealt within 48 business hours. At eight business
> ho
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:14:11PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> All abuse reports that we receive are dealt within 48 business hours.
At eight business hours per calendar day, and five business days per
(typical) calendar week, 48 business hours is... a week and a bit, calendar
wise.
- Matt
: Constant Abuse Reports / Borderline Spamming from RiskIQ
I would agree that Twitter is not a primary place for abuse reporting.
If they are reporting things via your correct abuse channel and you are indeed
handling them within 48 business hours, then I would also agree this much extra
spray and pray
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:45 AM Kushal R. wrote:
> All abuse reports that we receive are dealt within 48 business
> hours. As far as that tweet is concerned, it’s pending for 16 days
> because they have been blocked from sending us any emails
Hi Kushal,
I would venture a guess that's why they'v
On Mon, 13 Apr 2020, Kushal R. wrote:
As far as that tweet is concerned, it???s pending for 16 days because
they have been blocked from sending us any emails due to the sheer
amount of emails they started sending and then our live support chats.
This is not an acceptable answer.
-Dan
plaint only after two business days,
> that’s closing the barn door after the horse has bolted and crossed a state
> line.
>
> --srs
> From: NANOG on behalf of Tom Beecher
>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 12:11:18 AM
> To: Kushal R.
> Cc: Nanog ; Rich Kulawiec
&g
From: NANOG on behalf of Tom Beecher
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 12:11:18 AM
To: Kushal R.
Cc: Nanog ; Rich Kulawiec
Subject: Re: Constant Abuse Reports / Borderline Spamming from RiskIQ
I would agree that Twitter is not a primary place for abuse reporting.
If they are
I would agree that Twitter is not a primary place for abuse reporting.
If they are reporting things via your correct abuse channel and you are
indeed handling them within 48 business hours, then I would also agree this
much extra spray and pray is excessive. However RiskIQ is known to be
pretty re
All abuse reports that we receive are dealt within 48 business hours. As far
as that tweet is concerned, it’s pending for 16 days because they have been
blocked from sending us any emails due to the sheer amount of emails they
started sending and then our live support chats.
W
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 07:55:37PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> We understand these reports and deal with them as per our policies and
> timelines but this constant spamming by them from various channels is not
> appreciated.
Quoting from: https://twitter.com/RiskIQ_IRT/status/1249696689985740800
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 7:25 AM Kushal R. wrote:
> The problem isn’t the abuse reports themselves but the way they send them. We
> receive copies of the report, on our sales, billing, TECH-POCs and almost
> everything other email address of ours that is available publicly. It doesn’t
> end ther
Speaking of spam, I just sent a message in and got auto responses from:
c...@rankleads.com
kundserv...@axofinans.se
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:53 AM Denys Fedoryshchenko <
nuclear...@nuclearcat.com> wr
On 2020-04-13 17:25, Kushal R. wrote:
From the past few months we have been receiving a constant stream of
abuse reports from a company that calls themselves RiskIQ
(RiskIQ.com).
The problem isn’t the abuse reports themselves but the way they send
them. We receive copies of the report, on our sa
April 2020 at 7:57 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Constant Abuse Reports / Borderline Spamming from RiskIQ
>From the past few months we have been receiving a constant stream of abuse
>reports from a company that calls themselves RiskIQ (RiskIQ.com).
The problem isn’t the abuse reports themselves b
From the past few months we have been receiving a constant stream of abuse
reports from a company that calls themselves RiskIQ (RiskIQ.com).
The problem isn’t the abuse reports themselves but the way they send them. We
receive copies of the report, on our sales, billing, TECH-P
42 matches
Mail list logo
