Hello, I hope this is the right list to discuss. I'm seeing more and more providers auto-responding to abuse reports mailed to their "abuse-mailbox" address, stating that this mailbox will not be monitored and urging you to use some form on their website. And often enough, those forms are either only usable for very specific types of abuse or they are just tedious to use and sometimes I suddenly don't want to report spam or phishing anymore to that specific provider when I see a form with 20+ input fields. Besides that, it renders automatic reports useless, even those that are meant to be automatically processable (i.e., containing information as XARF). (Surely, automated reports are a very special topic, but as a provider we are grateful to receive prompt reports of abuse on our network.) This raises the questions: Is there – at least for the RIPE region – any sort of requirement to accept/process abuse reports by mail? While I'm sometimes a bit "pissed" about how bad reporting forms can be, I understand why providers might not want to maintain abuse mailboxes anymore (the amount of spam sent towards these addresses is hilariously large) and instead rely on forms with captchas to tackle this problem. So I'm wondering: Would there be a benefit for building some standardized HTTP API with an authentication system, that would allow providers to automatically send authenticated abuse reports to other providers? That could work in a similar way like DKIM does: The sending provider needs to publish a private key somewhere in the RIPE database, signs the report, and the receiving provider would be able to immediately verify that signature. And if you get a ton of false reports or even spam from a specific provider you can still filter these out based on the sender information in the signature. I would like to hear your opinion on this, or maybe there already *are* solutions I just don't know about yet (besides from manually reporting 20-30 phishing mails a day over 30 different forms). Thanks and greetings Max