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."

8 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. petition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Don't forget to sign the petition on Verisign's abuse of the DNS system.

    1. 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,
    2. Re:petition by delta407 · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you really want to make sure Verisign hears you, try some of my suggestions from other posts, duplicated below.

      A list of contact information is here. The Verisign main number is 1-877-438-8776, which gives you a long list of options. Depending on what you pick, you'll probably end up talking to a Network Solutions guy. Tell him you're distressed about the SiteFinder service, ask about what your options are, and ask if there's anyone else to talk to. They probably won't be much help, but write down everything they tell you, get their employee ID, and keep track of date/time for calls as well as time on hold (might be helpful).

      After some lengthy conversation, I found out that I should be talking to the Verisign Global Registry, but that they can't give me a phone number, because (supposedly) NSI doesn't even have a phone number. However, I did get an e-mail address -- sitefinder@verisign-grs.com, which is routed to someone's inbox (as in, a person, not a support center), which currently yields an "Out-of-office reply" that gives out a cell phone number (!). I don't think I'm going to call it, but at least I have more contact information on file now and an e-mail that will get read.

      Additionally, you might want to try calling the office of Russel Lewis, who's the VP of the Verisign directory services. He's at the Virginia office (1-703-742-0400), but I got disconnected instead of transferred and haven't called a second time (yet). If you try this number, you'll probably get a secretary, to whom you should explain that the standard procedures for communicating with Verisign have failed, that you are "very disappointed" and that you "want to make things right". (It works better if you're actually a Verisign customer.) If you're nice about it -- knowing that the secretary probably doesn't know anything about it and can't do anything anyway -- you can probably get routed to someone in the directory services division, where you can register further complaints.

      [...]

      I have been unable to raise the Chicago local office by phone, and when I went to visit, the visitor center couldn't even get a hold of them. Weird.

      I called their headquarters in CA a few times now. I was hung up on, randomly transferred to someone's voice mail (I'm not sure who), and finally talked to a particularly helpful representative who passed my queries to his manager. They said that SiteFinder was run by NSI, to which I responded that NSI said that SiteFinder was run by Verisign, to which I added that Verisign (as a global registry) is the only organization with the power to do something like that. He went to talk to his manager, told me that they were promised more information on SiteFinder by the end of today (9/17), and promised me a call-back in 24 hours.

      Updates to follow.

  3. In case it gets slashdotted... by skank · · Score: 5, Informative
    Verisign Typosquatter Explorer
    by Seth Finkelstein
    Introduction

    On Monday September 15 2003, a change to .com/.net behavior was announced. In sum, every mistyped domain name, one that had not been registered, would be redirected to a new site controlled by the company which runs a major part of the domain name system, Verisign.

    When a URL has a misspelled domain name, Verisign's changes have the effect of redirecting every single HTTP page request (technically, HTTP response code 302). There is a redirection header and page which displays:

    The document has moved here.



    So, for example, the URL

    http://verisign-is-to.net/more/evil/than/satan/h im self.html

    Gets redirected to:

    http://sitefinder.verisign.com/lpc?url=verisign- is -to.net/more/evil/than/satan/himself.html&host=ver isign-is-to.net

    This site suggests corrections to the typo. I have written a program " Verisign Typosquatter Explorer" in order to examine these suggestions. 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.
    Support

    This project was not supported by anyone. If anyone is providing financial support for such projects, the author would dearly like to know.

    Version 1.2 September 17 2003

    See also: Domain Investigations
    Mail comments to: Seth Finkelstein

    For future information: subscribe to Seth Finkelstein's Infothought list or read the Infothought blog

    See more of Seth Finkelstein 's Anticensorware Investigations

  4. Mail addresses by Ratface · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I mailed this little lot earlier today:

    authenticode-support@verisign.com, billing@verisign.com, channel-partners@verisign.com, clientpki@verisign.com, consultingsolutions@verisign.com, dbms-support@verisign.com, dcpolicy@verisign.com, digitalbranding@verisign.com, dnssales@verisign.com, enterprise-pkisupport@verisign.com, enterprise-sslsupport@verisign.com, info@verisign-grs.com, internetsales@verisign.com, IR@verisign.com, jobs@verisign.com, mss@verisign.com, objectsigning-support@verisign.com, paymentsales@verisign.com, practices@verisign.com, premiersupport@networksolutions.com, press@verisign.com, privacy@networksolutions.com, renewal@verisign.com, support@verisign.com, verisales@verisign.com, vps-support@verisign.com, vts-csrgroup@verisign.com, vts-mktginfo@verisign.com, webhelp@verisign.com, websitesales@verisign.com, websitesupport@verisign.com

    And I got a bunch of replies back, including *gasp* two written by actual human beings!

    Remember folks, if you're going to write and complain, try and keep it civil. The porr bugger who hsa to read your complaint isn't the same person who actually took the decision to introduce sitefinder!

    --

    A little planning goes a long way...
  5. Can we sue? by xchino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seriously, would it be possible for ISP's to file a class action suit? I have spent ALL day (so far) dealing with the repurcussions of this blatant misuse of authority. I know others out there are dealing with the same. I also had two customers get .ws websites rather than AVAILABLE .com sites because they use the method of putting the name in the browser and seeing if a site comes up. They figured verisign was squatting on the domain, and thought they would have to pay verisign for the use of the domain.

    On a side note...

    Our mail servers are filling up with spam, and with the recent loss of SPEWS, our spam filtering system is basically useless.. save for the few other blacklist sites still out there. Spammers must be rejoicing today.

    Fuck you VeriSign, Fuck you very much.

    --
    Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
  6. 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?