Verisign Typosquatter Explorer

jelyon quotes Seth Finkelstein's website "I have written a program " Verisign Typosquatter Explorer" in order to examine [the Verisign] suggestions [for mistyped domains]. Future data may be analyzed as interest permits. Note tests with some domains seem to return results which are not constant, i.e. differences when the program is run repeatedly. This is not a program bug. Reloading the Verisign page also changes which squat-suggested domains are displayed. I don't believe it's an advertising rotation, but the behavior is similar to that practice."

Comments

With all the stuff flying in IT today

[grasshoppa]

it's amazing anybody is able to accomplish anything.

Anybody else feel like you just want to start over, with only good people involved, and remake the internet? None of this patent crap, none of this copyright bullshit, just pure standards that are actual standards. Uncompromised and pure. No restrictions on data, short of the physical line speeds.

Yeah yeah, I know..."when you wish, upon a star"

Re:With all the stuff flying in IT today

[Osty]

Anybody else feel like you just want to start over, with only good people involved, and remake the internet? None of this patent crap, none of this copyright bullshit, just pure standards that are actual standards. Uncompromised and pure. No restrictions on data, short of the physical line speeds.

And you'd just have to do it all over again in 15-20 years, since that's exactly how the current net started.

Re:With all the stuff flying in IT today

[mumblestheclown]

I'd like to start over and remake the internet. With people who RESPECT copyrights, for an atmosphere where intellectual work is treated equitably, so that we can build real empires of information, education, and entertainment, rather than play lowest common denominator games of today. I'd like an internet where a small software development shop can compete against large shops and make a fair profit without today's reality that any software that becomes popular gets pirated en masse, ultimately benefitting only the established names. I'd like a world where a musician can sell their songs for a fair price on the internet without middlemen knowing that their monetay success will be a linear product of the number of fans the quality of their music attracts. I'd like an internet without the "geektelligencia" going 180 degrees the wrong way and bitching and whining about copyrights, when they should be the first one to see their value and fight vigorously to protect them.

Re:With all the stuff flying in IT today

[register_ax]

With people who RESPECT copyrights, for an atmosphere where intellectual work is treated equitably, so that we can build real empires of information, education, and entertainment, rather than play lowest common denominator games of today.

[begin normal homo sapien emotional response]
fsck that, seriously.
[allow adjustment for rational thinking]

Why respect copyright? Copyright was designed to give the creators exclusive rights to what is done with their material. This means they are gods of their own little universes, but people are infringing on their "rights" to this fact. I'm saying that we consider this our god-given right. Copyright is an attribute of a governing body. Yes, you are completely correct for copyright being a splendid idea for the US system and many other governing bodies around the world, however, please don't get caught up in the idea that this way will be the best for all eternity. So what I am saying is, don't consider copyright as an absolute sovereignty.

[The following paragraphs are not very coherent, proceed at your own risk. You have been warned.]

When you say "RESPECT copyrights," you're negating away from the root cause. People create the copyrights, right? We want to respect what people create, sure, but does that mean we respect the people? Well if you look at the current state of affairs, we don't really. We respect the law. We respect doctrines and paper. We respect copyright when there are rules governing us to do so. That's spiffy, but it's detracting us from something more fundamental.

It's obvious, respect people. Lemme esplain. With copyright we objectify. If we have no copyrights there is no restriction from impersonation, stealing ideas, and other bad things people can do with other person's things. There is also no restriction on creating derivative works and expanding on ideas which would otherwise (sometimes) lay stagnant. OK I know this sounds like stealing which is badBADBAD, but...

Imagine this, a world where people actually work together to get things done. Imagine the competitional greed (object = money = ideas = copyright/patent) in this world today. Right, a wonderful system if you adhere to certain rules. I'll risk destroying my argument by bringing up dee h4x0rs. They believe in a different stigma. Free access to all, right? Destroying a system will bring to light methods of improvement. So, manipulating someone's ideas allows for improvement on society as a whole. This is looking at the long term rather then the short.

As far as compensation goes for people, it will be in different forms (I'm not talking clams here). Others will grow around others and use ideas to progress their group as a whole. Note that the group might or might not be apparent. These could be researchers collaborating worldwide, or a few neighbors working on a project. Is it really worth it to withhold information that could contribute to the common good for the sake of self-gratification? Fsck your ego please so we don't have to live a life underground hiding from the robots. :)

I had better state that this is something that will be hard to make happen very soon (I mean within the next millenia (maybe it will be forced on us?)), but as I see it, inevitable. And you know what? I beg of you to alter and refine this information for publication in your next book. I hope very much you make millions of dollars from it too! :) How would you feel if you "stole" this from me and did it. You get conflicting messages, you might feel to compensate me, but I did give you permission. Aww...the perils of being human. :)

Summary
I'm not saying we should steal things, but that there should be nothing to steal.

* Profitable ideas are usually protected by a patent, but I lump it with copyright because copyright is a protection on artistic works (literary, musical, etc) and I see an elegant idea described on paper as artistic.

** Bits are free where things are "real"

Out-of-sync DBs?

[Lord Grey]

The phenomena could be easily explained as out-of-sync databases. Assuming that Verisign is using multiple database systems, that is.

But does it matter? What Verisign is doing is wrong. Exactly how they're wrong is irrelevant.

Re:Weird..

[Anonymous Coward]

A clickable goatse.cx link gets modded up to 5? What is slashdot coming to?

Re:petition

[grub]

I would like to see just one online petition that has carried any weight. It's the height of "slacktivism".

How did this make it as a headline?

[dentar]

This is news? Good god. I wish we could mod whole stories down... ;-(

To repeat the obvious...

[Anonymous Coward]

...and preach to the choir.

Verisign was contracted to run DNS servers for the .com and .net top-level domains; both of which are in practice "flat" address spaces, with no formalised lower-level hierarchy. If an organisation registers the domain "foo.com", implements nameservers for this domain, and then these nameservers ignore accepted practice and the way the majority of Internet applications expect the nameservice to work - then the organisation shoots only itself in the foot.

Verisign is in effect treating the entire top-level .com and .net domains as its corporate property.

If Verisign were genuinely ignorant of the effects of their move, then the company is not competent to operate TLD DNS services. If Verisgn were aware of the potential problems their decision could cause and went ahead regardless for commercial reasons then the company is not fit to operate TLD DNS services.

If ICANN cannot react to this nonsense in less than a working week, ICANN itself is not fit to direct the Internet naming service.

Apart from massed armies of geeks with pitchforks and flaming torches converging on Verisign and ICANN locations, does anyone have any constructive suggestions on how to get the parasites out of the loop?

Re:Think about it.

[Tom7]

If you think their servers are going to suffer under a slashdotting if they are now accepting ALL mistyped/obsolete domain names, think again. The slashdot traffic will be totally insignificant.

Wrote email to VeriSign

[SuperDry]

I wrote an email today to NetSol/VeriSign to voice my displeasure. As I have 5 or so domains up for renewal in October, along with various web and email hosting features that go along with them that are currently with NetSol. I told them that I would be moving everything to another registrar should they not have rescinded their change by my renewal date.

I know that my $300 a year may not be the end of the world to them, but I thought it important that they know that some people will make buying decisions based on this. And the types of people that handle DNS registration issues are just the types of people to be ticked off by this.

They sent me a form letter response, that addressed both this new unregistered DNS feature as well as the "register in advance for about-to-expire domains" feature that I didn't mention at all in my email. Their response to that issue was also defensive, so I take it that they're getting an earful on that one as well.

Re:On-line petitions don't work

[AmigaAvenger]

You are HALF right... They prefer you didn't send a letter, the other half about email and fax not being ignored hasn't changed...

Re:20 lines of perl code makes a Slashdot story?

[JustAnotherReader]

20 lines of perl code makes a Slashdot story?

It depends on the code. Remember, the DeCSS code was only 7 lines of Perl. That had fairly far reaching effects on the rights of computer users.

Re:ICANN, IAB, IETF official response

[zjbs14]

Check that date. It's ancient history and was a recommendation that Verisign not do what they just did.

We'll just have to wait and see if ICANN comes back and slaps them down

Re:Squating?

[slithytove]

The only difference I can think of is that Verisign didn't even have to buy the mispelled domains, which just makes it even more infuriating.
This is unquestionably an abuse of their "right" to manage the US TLDs and they should be stripped of it.
Personally I don't see why we couldnt have a distributed DNS system which would work something like freenet. The trademark office could push entries into the system, signed with their private key, and various other governmental, commercial and non-profit/private entities could push whatever entries they wanted onto the stack too.
It would be up to ISPs and individuals to pick which groups' entries to use and in what order.
Most people (and presumably all isps) would probably place the trademark offices' lists at the top so they could find the products and companies they seek (incidentally eliminating the problems associated with others registering your trademark as a domain).
A second tier of trustworthy companies would sell domain names (with market forces setting the cost based on how many isp's subscribe to their entries and how high up the search list most isp's place them)
Finally, I could make my own top-level domains by placing my own list near the top of every computers resolve.conf equivalent which I use.
No government-granted monopolies involved except the already existing trademark system and no need for an ultra-high-availability network at the top level.
If any of this strikes you as unfeasible you probably need to read more about freenet (or conceivably I do- let me know).

Re:ICANN, IAB, IETF official response

[morelife]

Exactly.

The original thread of 2 days ago on the Verisign fiasco contained this iab link and information, emphasizing the January date. I posted last night pointing out yet again that this response/recommendation by IAB made in January was completely ignored. Now MobyDisk is pointing this out yet AGAIN in an effort to correct your erroneous 5-Informative. Attention moderators: you are often modding important correct information down and out of sight and unimportant stuff that sounds authoritative up - come on tighten it up guys!!! Not a criticism negatively please don't take it that way - I realize for moderators there's probably too much information to have to digest quickly.

However, the IAB response is the most coherent response on technical grounds yet presented - recognize any of the names on that panel??