Banks, corporations, corner grocery stores, the guy walking down a street who gets approached for a loan from someone who claims his wallet was stolen and he needs a few euros for a meal and petrol to get home .. everyone is a fortune teller of sorts, and some
of them invest quite a lot in fraud / trust and safety teams, AIML and so on.
Why should RIPE NCC be any different?
From: Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org>
Sent: Monday, 03 August 2026 20:31:38
To: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeroen Massar <jeroen@massar.ch>; Serge Droz <serge.droz@first.org>; denis walker <ripedenis@gmail.com>; security-wg@ripe.net <security-wg@ripe.net>; Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
Subject: Re: [Security-wg] Abuse mailboxes are increasingly no longer monitored and are being replaced by (bad) forms
On 3 Aug 2026, at 14:10, Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
Rather than hand IP space out to bad actors like candy with minimal to no verification
You imply that it is possible tell ahead of time whether a new company is well intentioned or not.
In my view, trying to turn the RIPE NCC into some kind of fortune teller with an associated address registry is unlikely to end well.
Regards,
Leo