Slashdot Mirror


Anonymous Domain Registration for Protecting Privacy?

morpheus 2001 asks: "I'm a recent graduate working in a corporate environment. I would to register a domain for a blog, but want to protect my privacy. I would also like keep my employer (and others in my professional circle) from realizing that I am the author by checking the WHOIS for the domain. Under the current ICANN rules, anyone who registers a domain must provide their personal contact information. There are several domain registrars who claim to allow one to register a domain anonymously. They do this by registering in their name, but 'guarantee' the I retain ownership of the domain and can transfer it at any time to another registrar. Has anyone used an anonymous registrar? Did you have any problems retaining ownership? Do you have any recommendations for a reputable registrar? Is this a really stupid idead and bound to cause trouble?"

56 comments

  1. Fill in bs info by Isosonys · · Score: 1

    Ignor the rules fill it with crap and enjoy your new doamin.

    1. Re:Fill in bs info by Ivan+the+Terrible · · Score: 2, Informative

      The problem with this approach is that you'll never be able to prove that you are the owner of the domain. But if you willing to stick with only one registrar for the life of the domain, and you have an account with the registrar that's separate from the domain, then it might work.

  2. Someone else's name... by KDan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If all you want is to prevent them from tracing it back to you in particular (but don't care about anonymity from legal pursuits, and you aren't going to use that domain to do bad stuff) have you considered simply getting it registered under a friend's name? Anybody you can trust will do, really, and it's a lot more trustworthy than any of these companies that will "register it for you"... (imho)

    Daniel

    --
    Carpe Diem
    1. Re:Someone else's name... by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
      Someone you trust is the best bet, in my opinion. Sure, you could trust the company, but an individual who you have a relationship with is probably more trustworthy.

      Best bets, in decreasing order of trustworthiness: your mother, your attorney, your father, your siblings, your accountant, your friends, your pizza-delivery guy.

      Creating a corporation is not an option, because there's still a paper trail (if you're an officer of the corporation).

      Another poster mentioned using FreeNet, which is cheaper (no domain to register) but not nearly as easy for your users, both in terms of having to install the software, and having to wait 20 minutes for the page to load.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  3. Alias... by zbowling · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Under the icann roles you can use an Alias. It all came about when record artists where lossing their screenname alias to squaters. You can use an uncommon alias of your name. Like Mike if you go by Michall. Just something you can prove is you to get a domain back, but not something that people you know to know it is you when they do Whois lookups.

    --
    No.
    1. Re:Alias... by deflood · · Score: 1

      how about an anagram? my name for example: "deflood" to "elf dood".

    2. Re:Alias... by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but what about, Address, Phone #, etc?

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
  4. Freenet? by oroshana · · Score: 1

    I know this is probably not what you really want, but what about Freenet? Freenet might be slow right now, but that's just because you aren't on it ;o)

  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. Fill it out anonymously by DJayC · · Score: 0

    I've seen plenty of WHOIS entries what have (obviously) fake contact information. As far as I know most places let you change what goes in the record anyways. I would sign up for a domain, and then edit the contact information and set it to a false name, etc.. if you wish to do so. I'm almost positive you don't need a special registrar to handle that.

  7. If you're going to do this . . . by user+no.+590291 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    . . . make sure the reverse DNS for whatever box your hosting this on doesn't come back with something like yourname.com, as well.

  8. Using false information by alphaseven · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You could just fill in jibberish. This might give you some hassles if someone tries hijacking your domain, but if it's just a weblog just for a few strangers to look at you might not care. Depends on how important anonimity is to you, if your talking about inside dirt about some major coporation, I'd use blogspot or geocities and only post from internet cafes (freenet if you're really paranoid). If your just bitching occasionally about your boss at the video store then just use some fake whois info.

    Keep in mind whoever you register your domain with still has your billing information. If you say something that's legal but still pisses off a corporation or scientologists or something, they might use the lawsuit trick, where they sue you for libel, forcing the registar to hand over your identity, then they drop the lawsuit.

    1. Re:Using false information by yamla · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you fill in the registration using false information, anyone has a right to claim ownership over your domain and there is nothing you can do to prevent it.

      --

      Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
    2. Re:Using false information by aminorex · · Score: 1

      Ability, perhaps. Right -- never. You make the gibberish
      a phrase encrypted with your private key. Then your claim
      would be taken seriously by a court.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    3. Re:Using false information by Hard_Code · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because Mr. LL!@:#HASZXKJABM@N#!@$R^SADF&ZYHAJSKABNDF isn't an uncommon name at all!

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    4. Re:Using false information by phorm · · Score: 1

      Which is why it would be nice if most domain handlers had a passworded system. If you gibberize your whois info to avoid spamming, hackers, harassment, etc - but you know the password and the hijacking party doesn't - it should prove fairly well who has ownership.

      Of course, if there's large money involved, your registrar might just hand it over anyways.

  9. Did you consider publishing to freenet? by stever00t · · Score: 3, Informative

    Did you consider publishing to freenet? I get the feeling that Freenet (www.freenetproject.org) is exactly what you want - it's like the internet, but anonymous, encrypted, distributed, etc. etc. Oh, and it doesn't cost you any money to publish to Freenet.

    1. Re:Did you consider publishing to freenet? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      The Freenet would be excellent for this, but the Freenet is effectively only accessable to the (very) few people who are running Freenet nodes.

      Until there's a mainstream non-Java Freenet implementation, Freenet will probably never become terribly popular. The current Freenet implementation sucks down memory like there's no tomorrow (and isn't terribly efficient, for something that's always draining away cycles in the background).

    2. Re:Did you consider publishing to freenet? by dublin · · Score: 1

      Until there's a mainstream non-Java Freenet implementation, Freenet will probably never become terribly popular. The current Freenet implementation sucks down memory like there's no tomorrow...

      Freenet's not exactly lighting the world on fire even in a post-Napster P2P balkanized world. Face the facts: Freenet isn't popular for the very simple reason that you have *no* control over what's on your machine. (Just try explaining your "rights" to the FBI as they haul you off with several gigabytes of kiddie porn or terrorist training materials on your hard disk.) Even if getting "caught" were not a risk, a great many of us would never consider being part of Freenet simply because of the likelihood that we would unknowingly promote reprehensible things.

      I almost never agree with Alan Dershowitz, but he was right when he pointed out recently, "You have a right to privacy. You have NO right to anonymity."

      --
      "The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last ./ post
    3. Re:Did you consider publishing to freenet? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Face the facts: Freenet isn't popular for the very simple reason that you have *no* control over what's on your machine.

      *shrug* I disagree. Any http caching proxy runs into the same thing. It's highly unlikely that either of these folks will run into legal liability.

      Even if getting "caught" were not a risk, a great many of us would never consider being part of Freenet simply because of the likelihood that we would unknowingly promote reprehensible things.

      I suppose that many people probably do feel that way -- I happen to not particularly care, especially since Freenet simply treats data content-neutrally, as opposed to censoring it.

      All the people I know personally that have tried Freenet that I've talked to about it hate the implementation (too much of a pain to use, too high latency, bogs down computer), and don't care about what other data flows across the Freenet.

    4. Re:Did you consider publishing to freenet? by dublin · · Score: 1

      *shrug* I disagree. Any http caching proxy runs into the same thing. It's highly unlikely that either of these folks will run into legal liability.

      But there's on big difference: Any traffic crossing *my* cacheing proxy *is* the responsibility of someone on my network. Not so with Freenet.

      --
      "The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last ./ post
    5. Re:Did you consider publishing to freenet? by Sanity · · Score: 1
      I almost never agree with Alan Dershowitz, but he was right when he pointed out recently, "You have a right to privacy. You have NO right to anonymity."
      You chose a bad time to agree with him, since both of you are now on the opposite side of liberal to the supreme court.

      Free speech is meaningless without anonymity.

  10. .cx doesn't care by GigsVT · · Score: 1

    Works for the goatse people. .cx is pretty well known for not requiring real contact info.

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  11. Redundant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You want to publish a blog. Blogs normally contain gumpf and crap about a person's daily struggle with work, family, pets and people who serve you in shops plus the obligatory gripes about products and companies that have pissed you off recently. Surely this information alone is enough to track most folk down? If you're so concerned about privacy and anonymity, why are you considering posting your life story to a public accessible network? And why not just use some free geocities-type host which requires nothing more than a throw away hotmail address for registration? Do you *REALLY* need your own domain name?

  12. is this a good idea? by blackcoot · · Score: 1, Insightful

    think about it: anonymous domain registration is a boon to all the spammers out there for the exact same reasons you want the anynomyity -- no real way to trace back to the source of their pollution. i think a different approach is warranted in this case, something like asking your mom to register the domain using her maiden name and giving you a piece of paper saying that you hold all rights to (and responsibilities for) the domain.

  13. Re:Google by an_mo · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Why is it that every Ask Slashdot question there is some dude thinking they can be answered by querying google?

    Have you at least tried to check the link you posted? Did you notice those results don't answer the original posters' request? Did you at least read the article or is this an automated reply to all "ask slashdot" articles?

  14. Sounds akin to a trust holding title to shares etc by ivi · · Score: 1


    If the appropriate legal contracts are in place,
    this seems very much like Family or other Trusts
    holding ["at arms length"] shares, et al. on
    behalf of its member(s).

    In Australia, there may be tax advantages for
    those who use trusts.

    Politicians (who might be deemed to have conflicts-
    of-interest, eg when their shares' values may
    change with how the vote goes on some proposed
    legislation) have been known to place these
    shares (or their entire portfolio) into the
    hands of trust managers, to reduce their risks
    in this regard...

    'don't know if I am convinced that it's an
    effective mechanism for the purpose...

    Back on topic, I think anyone who -values-
    freedom of expression should find anonymous
    domain registration a worthy (if -not-
    absolutely necessary) tool for enhancing it.

    I wonder if a -temporary- domain name mechanism
    (like 'use-once' credit card numbers) would be
    of value, in this context?

    Maybe something like under a -new- TLD, eg
    '.tmp' that would make "time-division-
    multiplexing" of domain-name usage possible:

    [www.].tmp[.au]

    Modern database technologies already make
    liability-racing for such transient domain
    names quite possible technically, as the
    typical car rental agency package demonstrates.

    What'cha think...? ;-)

  15. proxy by oobar · · Score: 3, Informative

    Domains By Proxy specializes in just this. Ignore all these clowns that tell you to use false info.

    1. Re:proxy by dpete4552 · · Score: 1

      How much is it?

      --
      http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
    2. Re:proxy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be sure to read the terms of service first -- it's censorship city!

  16. Subdomains by damiam · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's a little less professional, but you could use one of the many DNS redirection services (dyndns.org, for example, offers free and premium services) to give you a yourname.sitename.org address. They generally require only an email address and password.

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  17. Form a sole proprietorship... by duffbeer703 · · Score: 1

    It costs about $25 to register to use a ficticious name. I think this is a great solution, because it protects you from domain hijackers while shielding you from casual snoops.

    --
    Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
  18. Re:Google by spoonist · · Score: 1, Insightful

    yeah, yeah, okay...

    he wants to know how to apply for a domain while maintaining his privacy, so i posted a link to google on "fake id" (as in how to make / obtain fake identification documents). the implication being that he could make / obtain a fake id then apply for a domain.

    let my post serve as a lesson for others:

    never mix sleep deprivation and attempts at subtle humor

  19. register it via a dummy name/corp via lawyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    costs more. but then anyone trying to look up the domain gets pointed there.

    also beware of how much info you give away to the ISP that's hosting it or by what a simple traceroute reveals.

    are you knowingly going to violate the law? better get your lawyer ahead of time silly.

  20. Re:Google by aminorex · · Score: 1

    You can't get the benefit of directly targeted, topical
    practical experience from Google.

    Why is it that every time anybody asks a question, some
    knee jerks and launches the 'ask google' football?

    I admit that some questions are pure google fodder.
    This one is not. It seeks opinions that are likely to be
    difficult to the point of impracticability to find in a
    google search. There are an infinitude of searches which
    might be appropriate, and a large number than might be
    productive, but no obvious means of constructing them.

    --
    -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
  21. Lawyer by mbstone · · Score: 2

    Call your local attorney and make an appointment. He or she will register the domain name and will keep your identity in strictest confidence unless ordered to divulge it by a court -- which is unlikely unless someone wants to sue and/or arrest you.

  22. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I haven't decided whether this is a new form of "first post" messages (who can get the first Google post out), or whether it is just plain old karma whoring. I suppose it could be likely that it is both; however, it does have a ring of "my Slashdot penis is bigger than yours" to it.

  23. Record nothing you don't want on the 6o'clock news by wowbagger · · Score: 2, Insightful
    One of the best rules of life is:
    Record nothing you wouldn't want on the 6 o'clock news


    If you are going to set up a blog, and you are concerned about your employer finding out about it, then don't do it. You should assume that if they care, they can find out who is behind the blog.

    They can, you know. They just claim that the blog has some DMCA prohibited content, get a takedown notice, go to the ISP, and find out where the wire leads. Even if you host on some East Elbownian server, they can find out who is behind it if they care badly enough.

    You are concerned that your employer might find out. OK, you can do one of two things that can work:
    1. You go to your employer, and tell them what you want to do up front. You inform them that you will be exercising your right of freedom of speech, and that you will not post private company information. You see what they do. If they are such bastards that they will give you grief over this, do you really want to work for them?
    2. You do this anyway, keeping meticulous logs and notes. If your company ever gives you grief over this, you are prepared to fight this out in court.


    But trying to do this anonymously and hoping your boss doesn't find out is a losing proposition.
  24. Another solution by dacarr · · Score: 1
    1) Rent a post office box
    2) come up with a pseudonym
    3) ...
    4) um... profit?

    Seriously, if it's important enough to you to receive dead tree material related to your domain or otherwise establish an address for a domain, come up with some pseudonym and stick a PO box address in there.

    --
    This sig no verb.
    1. Re:Another solution by user+no.+590291 · · Score: 1

      I take it you haven't actually tried to get a P.O. Box or mail drop in the U.S. without showing ID. It's not as easy as you make it sound.

    2. Re:Another solution by dacarr · · Score: 1
      And this poses a problem because...?

      Yes, they need to link you to a solid address for fraud reasons (and to prevent ID theft), so if you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about, right?

      But now this ventures to topic drift.

      --
      This sig no verb.
    3. Re:Another solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have gotten plenty of mail drops with some pretty questionable ID's (fake school ID, etc.) and never had any trouble. In fact, that is why I always used mail drops instead of PO boxes, because with the mail drops you could have anonymity.

    4. Re:Another solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      used to be you could find mail drops listed in magazines like Soldier of Fortune, etc. I find myself in the market for one in the Oakland CA area, but don't know how to locate one. Any ideas?

    5. Re:Another solution by user+no.+590291 · · Score: 1

      I'd be suspicious that any mail drops listed in SoF were FBI honeypots, especially in these times.

  25. Don't worry about contact info by zaqattack911 · · Score: 1

    Chances are, if you use your blog to bitch about your useless daily life, nobody is going to read it anyways.

    But, if you ARE that VAIN... just register underneath one of those big blog sites that will give you a free blog.. Unless you are starting a business, I don't see how a proper domain name all for you is that necessary. I can't count how many people I know who registered "COOL" Domain names that don't use them, and collect dust.

    Christ.. I'm still trying to figure out why this blog bs took off, and when will it return from whence it came.

  26. Re:GoDaddy by TheDarkRogue · · Score: 2, Informative

    I Did use their privacy service, It's called Domians By Proxy. You still have full control of it but it shows up with them as the contact info. They will forward messages to you and such including postal mail, but from there they do not respond to anyting for you, thats up to you, but for that just grab a hotmail account or something.

    --
    (Score:0, Interesting)
  27. That's because he's really making a porn site by Tom7 · · Score: 1

    Obviously it's not really for a blog, it's for a porn site.

  28. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please don't use "slash" and "penis" in the same sentence.

  29. Tonic!! by Travoltus · · Score: 1
    Try http://www.tonic.to, they do not publish your personal information via WHOIS, and do not give out any personal info without a court order.

    w00t.
    From http://www.tonic.to/faq.htm?7B00EBB7;;;#16 :
    Does Tonic offer a whois service ?
    Tonic does not maintain a whois database that provides registrant information, as many of our customers consider the public display of this information invasive of their privacy. In fact, we will never sell a mailing list of our customers.
    --
    --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
  30. Freenet in C by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check out Entropy. It is a Freenet implementation in C, which tries to retain compatibility with the original Freenet.

  31. No, do better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have your lawyer set up a holding company held in trust in Delaware, that owns another holding company in the Cayman islands which operates in conjunction with a limited partnership in Vanatu, where you are a silent and unlisted partner via your Cayman shell corporation. Hire a Vanatu tribesman as an employee of your Cayman outfit, and have him contract, with other islanders as 'majority' stake holders in the partnership assets, but with a binding contract on the assets allowing the Cayman outfit full administrative access rights. Pay your bills through an offshore credit card registered to a partnership account and pay revenues to your partners of a few dollars a year + your internet fees, all of which is automatically deducted from a partnership account in a Cayman islands bank. As long as your tribesman keep their revenue stream they probably won't turn you over. And even if they wanted to, they can't read, speak a bizarre language, don't know your name so won't be able to turn you over. If they give you up they will have to track down your shell company, which will only have a PO box and an answering machine which is turned off. And as a last line of defense your lawyer set up your trust and has attorney client privilidges. Also, post disclaimers for all of your postings and retract all hot button information after it has been distributed. "Oops, I just posted my company salary list, oops, it was an accident, I posted the wrong info. Sorry I thought it was a birthday list." That way even if they do catch you, you have minimal CYA implementation and reasonable doubt or better in any court proceeding. Also be sure to make a yearly trip to the Caymans, preferably by a secret boat trip, to fill up your credit card account and bank account with cash, no wire transfers or paper trail. If your partners mess with you, have them liquidated by 'auditors' purchased by your Cayman islands outfit and replaced with more pliable, illiterate Vanatu tribesmen. This can all be done on a low budget of $15,000 to $3,000,000,000 a year depending on legal fees, auditor fees and other business expenses such as hookers and guns. Or you can just misspell all of your information or use a legal alias so no one can look it up.