<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body>
<div dir="ltr">
<div></div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">This is correct but additionally, I don�t see how adding a separate security contact resolves the problem of outdated or misdirected (as in, not from your network) compromise incident reports.</div>
<div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature">
<div><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">You don�t have to break into your customers offices to patch their machines. You can just as well acl those IPs off till your customer has patched the vuln. Might even deploy a walled garden like Comcast implemented over a decade back, if you�re
a large SP.</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr">--srs</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 7, 2022 4:50:58 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net <anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Adding a "Security Information" contact?</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText"><br>
<br>
> On 7 Jun 2022, at 12:14, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> Hi,<br>
> <br>
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 11:02:19AM +0000, �ngel Gonz�lez Berdasco via anti-abuse-wg wrote:<br>
>> I don't think the problem would be to add a new attribute if needed.<br>
>> The problem would be to *define* what should go there (and then get<br>
>> everyone downstream to use that new attribute)<br>
> <br>
> This... so, what would you suggest?<br>
<br>
It would be nice, both for abuse contacts, and the potential security contact, to be able to advertise that you<br>
accept machine readable reports, what formats and how to accept them. There�s an obvious advantage<br>
for the abuse/security desk consuming reports for that, but it would also be an improvement in many ways<br>
for generators of reports over the current system where abuse-c contains an email address, and that email<br>
address is just an autoresponder saying that mail sent there isn�t read (but there�s this other channel over<br>
here you can use).<br>
<br>
I�ve a nasty feeling that any email address added as a security contact will be used as an additional<br>
place to report spam coming from the network, which might not be what the people on the end of that<br>
alias really need more of.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Steve<br>
-- <br>
<br>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit:
<a href="https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg">https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</body>
</html>