Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Verisign Typosquatter Explorer

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the something-to-think-about dept.

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."

3 of 367 comments (clear)

  1. Out-of-sync DBs? by Lord+Grey · · Score: 5, Insightful
    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.

    --
    // Beyond Here Lie Dragons
  2. Re:petition by grub · · Score: 5, Insightful


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

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  3. To repeat the obvious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...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?