In message <26f1df33-b958-bed4-f748-f82324d0b...@tana.it>, Alessandro Vesely <ves...@tana.it> wrote:
>Shouldn't there be a standard for automatically forwarding messages destined >to abuse-c following a path similar to that of RFC 2317 delegations? I'd love >if AA training encouraged such behavior. Although delegation of abuse report handling may sound like a good idea in theory, in practice it is a tragically bad idea. What happens when the customer is a spammer and abuse handling is delegated to that customer? Google for the term "list washing". This isn't merely a theoretical possibility. Digital Ocean has previously sent me multiple response emails saying quite explicitly that they had forwarded my spam reports to their spammer customer(s). Those customers will then surely cease to spam *me* but will continue to spam everyone else on the planet. This does not create any meaningful reduction in the global spam load. It simply rewards those "responsible" spammers who remove from their target lists the email addreses of the few "complainers" who nowadays take the time to report spam. Regards, rfg
