[sig-policy] prop-079-v003: Abuse contact information
Version 3 of the proposal 'Abuse contact information' has been sent to
the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at
APNIC 29 in Kuala Lumpur, 1-5 March 2010.
Information about this and other policy proposals is available from:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals
This new version of the proposal reflects feedback from the community
received on the Policy SIG mailing list:
- The wording of section 1 has been simplified.
- The "Summary of the current problem" in section 2 has been
rewritten.
- Section 4.1 has been reworded slightly.
- The last bullet point in section 5.1 has been rewritten.
- Section 5.2 refers to the discussion on whois data accuracy that
has taken place on the Policy SIG list.
We encourage you to express your views on the proposal:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal?
- Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
- What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
effective?
Randy, Ching-Heng, and Terence
________________________________________________________________________
prop-079-v003: Abuse contact information
________________________________________________________________________
Author: Tobias Knecht <tk at abusix dot org>
Version: 3
Date: 24 February 2010
1. Introduction
----------------
This is a proposal to introduce a mandatory reference to IRT objects in
the inetnum, inet6num and aut-num objects in the APNIC Whois Database.
The proposal aims provide a more accurate and efficient way for abuse
reports to reach the correct network contact.
2. Summary of current problem
------------------------------
Network owners increasingly operate dedicated abuse handling
departments, distinct from the basic operations department.
More and more network owners and other institutions are also starting to
exchange data about abusive behavior with each other, to more quickly
allow networks to identify internal abuse, external abuse, and other
security problems.
Currently within the APNIC region, the growing amount of abuse reports
are sent to tech-c or admin-c contacts, as encouraged on the APNIC
website.[1] These addresses are used because the APNIC Whois Database
currently has no mandatory, specialised contact object for abuse
departments. Instead, all abuse reports are sent to contact that has
broader responsibilities or different responsibilities.
3. Situation in other RIRs
---------------------------
AfriNIC:
There are currently no specific abuse-related fields implemented in
the AfriNIC Whois Database. However, if the current proposal is
successful in the APNIC region, the author plans to submit a
similar proposal for the AfriNIC region.
ARIN:
An abuse-POC exists for Organizational ID identifiers.[2]
LACNIC:
An abuse-c exists for aut-num, inetnum and inet6num objects.[3]
RIPE:
An optional IRT (Incident Response Team) object can be linked to
inetnum and inet6num objects.[4] If the current proposal is
successful in the APNIC region, the author plans to submit a
similar proposal for the RIPE region.
4. Details of the proposal
---------------------------
It is proposed that APNIC:
4.1 Institute a mandatory reference to an IRT object in inetnum,
inet6num and aut-num objects.
In terms of implementing a mandatory IRT reference, it is
suggested that this be part of two established actions:
- The next time an organization attempts to update an existing
inetnum, inet6num or aut-num object
- When new inetnum, inet6num or aut-num objects are added to the
database
4.2 Have a mandatory abuse-mailbox field in the IRT object.
4.3 Delete abuse-mailbox fields in all objects that do not refer to an
IRT, and delete the trouble field everywhere starting 2011.
5. Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
------------------------------------------------
5.1 Advantages
- Networks will be able to supply their own, direct contact
information for abuse departments.
- Abuse complaints will not be sent to the "wrong" contact any more.
- This permits greater administrative and operational flexibility,
and faster abuse handling will be possible.
5.2 Disadvantages
- Introducing a mandatory reference to the IRT Object will establish
a new object. This object, like all other existing objects, will
face the data accuracy problem. This proposal aims to address the
issue of a missing place for abuse contact information and will
not improve data accuracy in the whois database. Data accuracy
will be part of another proposal that is already being discussed
on the policy mailing list.
6. Effect on APNIC members
---------------------------
There will be no immediate affect for APNIC members with existing
resource registrations already in the APNIC Whois Database.
However, members will need to add a reference to the mandatory IRT
object in the following situations:
- The first time members attempt to update an existing inetnum,
inet6num or aut-num object
- When members add new inetnum, inet6num or aut-num objects
7. Effect on NIRs
------------------
It would be of benefit to the whole Internet community if NIRs were to
implement a similar abuse contact scheme in their whois databases. But
this would be another proposal.
8. References
--------------
[1] Reporting abuse and spam http://www.apnic.net/reporting-abuse
[2] Introduction to ARIN's Database
https://www.arin.net/knowledge/database.html#abusepoc
[3] There is no formal documentation on abuse-c in inetnum and inet6num
objects, but for documentation on the abuse-c in ASN records, see
LACNIC Policy Manual (v1.3 - 07/11/2009)
http://lacnic.net/en/politicas/manual4.html
[4] IRT Object FAQ
http://www.ripe.net/db/support/security/irt/faq.html