[DBWG] Malformed changed: fields in route: objects

[Frank Habicht]

Thank you Yogesh,

that's a good step forward to improve consistency.

Regards,
Frank

On 23/07/2021 17:44, Yogesh wrote:

>

> Dear DGWG members,

>

>  

>

> We have worked on a fix to correct the malformed 'changed' attributes

> and we have implemented validation of the e-mail address to prevent

> similar problems in the AFRINIC database.

>

>  

>

> This issue will be resolved after the next scheduled deployment, on

> Tuesday 27 July 2021. You may it follow on https://status.afrinic.net/

> <https://status.afrinic.net/>.

>

>  

>

> Best regards,

>

> Yogesh Chadee

>

>  

>

>  

>

> *From:*Yogesh Chadee <yogesh at afrinic.net>

> *Sent:* Monday, 19 July 2021 18:17

> *To:* dbwg at afrinic.net

> *Subject:* Re: [DBWG] Malformed changed: fields in route: objects

>

>  

>

> Hi,

>

>  

>

> Thank you very much for reporting this. The software engineering team

> will look into this bug immediately and correct it.

>

>  

>

> Kind regards,

>

> Yogesh Chadee

>

>  

>

> *From: *Ronald F. Guilmette <mailto:rfg at tristatelogic.com>

> *Sent: *Sunday, 11 July 2021 07:23

> *To: *hostmaster at afrinic.net <mailto:hostmaster at afrinic.net>;

> dbwg at afrinic.net <mailto:dbwg at afrinic.net>

> *Subject: *[DBWG] Malformed changed: fields in route: objects

>

>  

>

> I am attempting to parse the contents of the changed: fields within

>

> the route and route6 objects that are present in the redacted form of

>

> the AFRINIC WHOIS data base that is available via FTP.  (The unredacted

>

> form of the data base is still being pointlessly withiheld from legitimate

>

> researchers such as myself, so I am obliged to work only with the redacted

>

> form of the data base.)

>

>  

>

> The general form of any given changed: field within the data base appears

>

> to be:

>

>  

>

>      changed:   email-address date

>

>  

>

> This simple format would be easy enough to parse with consistant results

>

> if it were not for the two facts that (1) some few nitwits were allowed

>

> to enter email addresses of the form:

>

>  

>

>      email-address<mailto:email-address <mailto:email-address>>

>

>  

>

> combined with that fact that (2) AFRINIC's redaction process, via which

>

> the redacted version of the data base is gnerated and placed onto

> AFRINIC's

>

> FTP server apparently becomes confused by the above style of malformed

>

> email addresses, with the result being that the content of (malformed)

>

> changed: fields become truncated at the @ (at-sign) that appears within

>

> the <mailto:XXX <mailto:XXX>> part of these malformed changed: lines. 

> Thus, within

>

> the redacted WHOIS data base, the lines in question end up looking like

>

> this:

>

>  

>

>       changed:        ***@viva.co.zm<mailto:asif

> <mailto:***@viva.co.zm%3cmailto:asif>

>

>  

>

> Obviously, it is not pssoble to obtain the relevant date stamp in these

>

> cases, because it has been improperly redacted out by AFRINIC's WHOIS

>

> redaction process.

>

>  

>

> The affected IPv4 route objects are as follows:

>

>  

>

> routesum: 102.140.124.0/22 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.120.0/23 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.122.0/23 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.124.0/23 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.126.0/23 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.120.0/24 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.121.0/24 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.122.0/24 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.123.0/24 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.124.0/24 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.125.0/24 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.126.0/24 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.140.127.0/24 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

> routesum: 102.223.168.0/22 [328581] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

>  

>

> In the case of IPv6 routes, only the following single IPv6 route object is

>

> affected by this problem:

>

>  

>

> route6sum: 2c0f:ec88::/32 [328328] - Missing or malformed changed: field

>

>  

>

> It would be helpful if the hostmaster would correct the form and

> content of

>

> all of the above malformed route objects.

>

>  

>

> It would also be helpful if the hostmaster would take whatever steps may

>

> be necessary in order to insure that this type of prooblem does not creap

>

> back into the data base in the future, i.e. by pre-filtering the email

>

> addresses that will ultimately be placed into changed: lines in the data

>

> base and by pre-checking them for reasonable and consistant syntactic

> form.

>

>  

>

>  

>

> Regards,

>

> rfg

>

>  

>

> _______________________________________________

>

> DBWG mailing list

>

> DBWG at afrinic.net <mailto:DBWG at afrinic.net>

>

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/dbwg

> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/dbwg>

>

>  

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> DBWG mailing list

> DBWG at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/dbwg


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/dbwg/attachments/20210723/48c91390/attachment-0001.html>