Mastodawn

There is just... SO MUCH... wrong with this.

@tfiebig I am facing my palm.

For a long while now I've been thinking that technical organizations that have to deal with spurious / BS abuse reports should simply charge a processing fee against the frequent sources of these BS abuse reports.

After a second shitty report, they get an e-mail about what was shitty about it and that if these points are repeated in their next abuse report, they will be invoiced.

After the third, they get invoiced.

Show thread

Tobias Fiebig

@rysiek I actually started to do that to a DMCA takedown thing. Only stopped after I cc'ed finance to ask for their invoice address, insisting that them continuing to send (repeated, timed out) reports after I told them the next one will be charged was essentially agreement to my terms.

Show thread

Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦1d ago

@tfiebig nice!

Show thread

Alan Langford 🇨🇦🧤🧊摏 1d ago

@tfiebig @rysiek Yes, that's it! Instead of reporting a "brute force" [LOL], the original message should have said that the SSH probing was causing reports to be generated that required billable human intervention, and that any further probing was essentially agreement to their terms and would result in an invoice.

Show thread

Tobias Fiebig 1d ago

@alan @rysiek I am prertty sure that the probing did not cause human intervention in that case.

Show thread

Alan Langford 🇨🇦🧤🧊摏 1d ago

@tfiebig @rysiek Even if it did, usually there's a way to get on an exclusion list.

But still, I'd love to bill some of these AI scrapers...