Are you some kind of voyeur that likes to snoop in other people's private business?
Where I go in the internet is my business alone, just like were I go outside my house. And having an online version of China's social credit tracking me online to see if I behave is not a good thing.
You are providing a service that is actively diminishing (already brittle) internet privacy and I have 0 love for people doing that.
In that context it makes sense that a cloud IP that's used to send mail would be treated with suspicion if it's seen trying to make a purchase on an e-commerce site.
When web sites increase the amount of hassling (and make no mistake about it, garbage like this, CAPTCHAs, nonconsensual "SMS 2FA" etc are all just hassles to customers), I file support tickets about their broken website. If a website continues down the path of snake oil to the point of becoming unusable, I generally end up no longer being a customer.
I hope you choke on your own scores when a future-AWS-using-your-scores will deny your servers acces, because you accidentally sent an email from that server that was actually supposed to be doing something else.
Random company website you are visiting: "We're sorry, we can't offer you access to our service today, as you IP score was below our required threshold. Please try again later and have a nice day."
And if it doesn't, do you think that is a better solution, solving a captcha every 5 minutes? Just try using Google from behind a serious VPN provider, see how that works for you.
Also, what is your opinion on geoblock, do you think that is a good thing?
It seems you are one of the company's representatives that has never in his life consistently used a VPN or Tor, so you don't even know to what kind of restricted internet your company's products are leading to.
These services make it impossible to participate online without giving big tech your identity. IMO they’re worse than everyone else combined because they play a critical role in helping all tech companies discriminate against people that want privacy.
I guess that's perhaps one of the "benefits" of sitting behind CGNAT (from what I can tell), where nobody can host their own stuff and thus various sites (good or bad) hosted on residential connections and other interesting use cases aren't a thing.
It still doesn't feel too good to need cloud VPSes that act as proxies just so I can expose some sites from my homelab (e.g. a Nextcloud instance of D&D session recordings and other game details), even though for whatever reason it's still cheaper than asking the ISP for static IP addresses (e.g. a ~5 euro/month VPS).
That said, all of my VPS IP addresses (which I've had assigned to my servers for a few years) routinely scored 15-25 and landed in the "High risk" trust scores, even though they have 0 threats showing up. Guess running my own VPN to tunnel my connection through them might not be the best idea, if I wanted to do that in the future?
Threats: 0
Trust score: 0 - High risk
So what this means is, "even though this IP hasn't been reported anywhere we still think it's high risk".
Does a consumer have any insight into what the model does/doesn't like about an IP, or is it a black box?
I'm wondering how they could contextualize a score for their use case, or how I as the IP owner know what to fix to raise the score.
Source: I work for IPinfo. We don't do "IP Reputation Score". We provide the attributes/insights related to an IP address, the user makes the decision of how to use that information.
But it still comes somewhat close to a China-social-credit system for the internet.
https://www.turnkey-lender.com/blog/data-enrichment-is-the-s...
Almost entirely children.
There were 73 million children in the U.S. in 2019—22 percent of our nation's population.
That doesn't make a website server from this IP an attacker!
Datacenter is not necessarily a "threat", but if a datacenter is trying to post to your website comment form, it's certainly posting some kind of spam or SQL injection attempt, and it's not a message from a legitimate customer. (Datacenter is actually a highly effective flag for detecting spam.)
You are wrong. I use that and a minority of legit people also do.
The problem with your type of thinking is that you are only thinking in terms of what the population majority is doing and how they are behaving - lumping the minority of privacy conscious user in with all kinds if malicious actors. Basically the type of thinking that leads to all kinds of discrimination, unfortunately.
Not sure why iCloud relay would be a problem.
Blocklists based threat detection is however limited since they cannot contain every possible bad IP which leads to a lot of false negatives.
To fix this we created an IP Reputation scoring model [1] and currently provide 4 scores.
- Trust Score - VPN Score - Proxy Score - Threat Score
The Trust Score simply aggregates the other 3 scores and is a value from 0 - 100, with 100 being a very high reputation IP address.
[0] https://docs.ipdata.co/docs/ip-reputation-scores [1] https://docs.ipdata.co/docs/ip-reputation-scores
Seriously?