Slashdot Mirror
Private .US Registrations Disallowed by NTIA
jnetsurfer writes "Apparently, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration ("NTIA") has decided that domains under the TLD .US have no right to privacy. New domain names ending in .US will not be able to be registered as "private" and current owners of .US names will be forced to reveal their contact information starting "no later than January 26, 2006". This means that you can't run an annonymous website with a .US TLD. If you don't like this, feel free to sign the petition."
...but I don't want to give out my name, adress, email, et cetera.
Get a .COM
ICANN imposes $2 internet tax
ethics is so overrated (see us gov for examples) you would think people would have a bit more integrity
can you imagine what a mess the Internet is gonna be in 10 years, you think spam and commercialism is bad now, shame because it could of been so much more
Here's the email I received from Godaddy.com regarding this issue:
.US domain names. In addition, if you already own a private .US domain name registration, you will be forced to forfeit your privacy no later than January 26, 2006. By that time, you will need to choose between either making your personal information available to anyone who wants to see it, or giving up your right to that domain name.
.US privacy was stripped away, without due process, by a federal government agency -- an agency that should be looking out for our individual rights. For the NTIA to choose the .US extension is the ultimate slap in your face. .US is the only domain name that is specifically intended for Americans (and also those who have a physical presence in our great country). So think about this for a moment. These bureaucrats stripped away the privacy that you're entitled to as an American, on the only domain name that says that you are an American. I am outraged by this -- you should be also.
"Today I have the unfortunate responsibility of informing you that there has been a decision made by bureaucrats of a Federal agency that takes away your right to privacy as guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
This decision was unilaterally made by the National Telecommunications and Information Association ("NTIA") www.ntia.doc.gov without hearings that would determine the impact on those affected, and delivered without notice -- in short, the NTIA decision was made without due process of any kind. This is exactly how our government is not supposed to work.
The effect of this decision is to disallow new private domain name registrations on
I personally find it ironic that our right to
If, like me, you are outraged at the NTIA's decision to strip away our constitutional right to privacy, www.TheDangerOfNoPrivacy.com will provide you with a petition to sign. (Only your name will be published, your address and email information will be kept private.) This Web site also provides a very easy way for you to send either a fax or an email, expressing your outrage, to your Congressperson and Senators. This is all provided at no cost to you. All that is required is for you to take the time to visit www.TheDangerOfNoPrivacy.com sign the petition, and send the fax or email to your legislators.
On my personal Blog, www.BobParsons.com there are a number of articles where you can learn more about the NTIA's unfortunate decision and what you can do to help get it reversed.
I also will be talking about our right to privacy on Radio Go Daddy, our weekly radio show that debuts today, March 30, at 7 PM PST. To find out how to listen in, please visit the Web site dedicated to the show, www.RadioGoDaddy.com.
You can be sure that I, and everyone at GoDaddy.com, will do everything in our power to get the NTIA decision reversed. However, we need your help. Please visit www.TheDangerOfNoPrivacy.com to sign the petition and express your feelings to your Congressperson and Senators.
Sincerely,
Bob Parsons
President and Founder
GoDaddy.com"
--It's Pimptastic!--
There are many third parties that will register your domain name with valid contact information that isn't related to you at all.
Other than that, it should be pointed out that ICANN has had a rule for years that you must have valid contact information in your WHOIS records. Of course, they've also ignored that same rule for years.
I'm a big tall mofo.
I was under the impression that DNS ownership records for other TLDs (E.g. .com) had to be publically? At least in theory, it should also be geniune and correct.
.us be a special case? Being able to find accurate data from a simple whois is an important tool for a lot of network administrators.
Why should
One less TLD for spammers to abuse.
This is your sig. There are thousands more, but this one is yours.
I believe that all .com and .net etc... should be a subset of a country suffix. Too many companys and organisations hide their origin as .com is too generic.
and this to me blurrs what specific law applies to what information.
The Danish hostmaster recognize the individuals right to privacy, and if you wish to be "unlisted" you can be. Of course they know who you are, and break the law they'll hand over your information to the police.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
does this mean i can t run a toys r us anonymously ?
...is having to pay extra for my domain to be "private"... at least with godaddy.com.
.US domain anonymously, but they still want you to pay extra for it.
I got an e-mail from godaddy yesterday about this ruling, and the whole time I was reading it I was thinking of how godaddy is almost hypocritical in sending such an e-mail.
They want you to sign the petition to allow you to register the
Anonymity should be free.
The owner of the domain fuc.kthe.us - reported here probably isn't going to like this...
Indy Media Watch-Proctologist of the Internet
By following the link from the petition site to the NTIA home page, there's nothing there about this particular decision, and some preliminary hunting hasn't shown up the relevant article for this.
Most of the time us Slashdot readers can find the information for ourselves, but here we are being asked to sign a petition based on the evidence presented by the poster, not by reading the docs for ourselves (of cause we would all have RTFA if it was posted, obviously). I think it's a bit underhand asking us to sign this petition on an obsure decision that is not easy to find, without providing a link to the decision.
If anyone can find a link to the decision I'd be very grateful.
Most of us will pay to register them with a credit card or a check or something with our identity attached to it anyway. If anyone really wanted to find out who owns/runs the domain it wouldn't be too hard. Most of the time, they could also figure it out by tracing where it is hosted and finding some information on who pays the bills there as well.
If you want a free (and anonymous) web page, sign up for some cheesy service online where you are a subdomain of someone else. If not, then pony up and give some legit information to the company you buy the domain from.
All your domains are belong to .US
The .US Registry has disabled and locked numerous .US domains containing "dirty" words alone, regardless of whether the domains were actually used or not.
.US - but then America is full of contradictions :(
.ORG / .NET for years and never had any problems ... yet, my FuckCensorship.US domain was only active for a short time and then disabled/locked.
.US domains are best avoided for anything critical ... not solely because of the censorship issues, but rather more so because the .US Registry changes polices willy nilly with little regard to registrants.
So much for freedom of speech and expression in
I've owned FuckCensorship.COM /
In short,
Domain Name FUCKCENSORSHIP.US
Domain ID D1877066-US
Sponsoring Registrar INTERCOSMOS MEDIA GROUP, INC. D.B.A. DIRECTNIC.COM
Domain Status serverDeleteProhibited
Domain Status serverTransferProhibited
Domain Status serverUpdateProhibited
Registrant ID IMG-146583
Registrant Name Ron Bennett
Registrant Organization Ron Bennett
Registrant Address1 PO BOX 6532
Registrant City Wyomissing
Registrant State/Province PA
Registrant Postal Code 19610-0532
Registrant Country United States
Registrant Country Code US
Registrant Phone Number +1.6107776566
Registrant Email bennett@wyomissing.com
Registrant Application Purpose P1
Registrant Nexus Category C11
Administrative Contact ID IMG-146583
Administrative Contact Name Ron Bennett
Administrative Contact Organization Ron Bennett
Administrative Contact Address1 PO BOX 6532
Administrative Contact City Wyomissing
Administrative Contact State/Province PA
Administrative Contact Postal Code 19610-0532
Administrative Contact Country United States
Administrative Contact Country Code US
Administrative Contact Phone Number +1.6107776566
Administrative Contact Email bennett@wyomissing.com
Administrative Contact Application Purpose P1
Administrative Contact Nexus Category C11
Billing Contact ID IMG-146583
Billing Contact Name Ron Bennett
Billing Contact Organization Ron Bennett
Billing Contact Address1 PO BOX 6532
Billing Contact City Wyomissing
Billing Contact State/Province PA
Billing Contact Postal Code 19610-0532
Billing Contact Country United States
Billing Contact Country Code US
Billing Contact Phone Number +1.6107776566
Billing Contact Email bennett@wyomissing.com
Billing Contact Application Purpose P1
Billing Contact Nexus Category C11
Technical Contact ID IMG-146583
Technical Contact Name Ron Bennett
Technical Contact Organization Ron Bennett
Technical Contact Address1 PO BOX 6532
Technical Contact City Wyomissing
Technical Contact State/Province PA
Technical Contact Postal Code 19610-0532
Technical Contact Country United States
Technical Contact Country Code US
Technical Contact Phone Number +1.6107776566
Technical Contact Email bennett@wyomissing.com
Technical Contact Application Purpose P1
Technical Contact Nexus Category C11
Name Server INVALIDNS1.NEUSTAR.COM
Name Server INVALIDNS2.NEUSTAR.COM
Created by Registrar INTERCOSMOS MEDIA GROUP, INC. D.B.A. DIRECTNIC.COM
Last Updated by Registrar BATCHCSR
Domain Registration Date Wed Apr 24 17:52:47 GMT+00:00 2002
Domain Expiration Date Sat Apr 23 23:59:59 GMT+00:00 2005
Domain Last Updated Date Sat Apr 24 04:35:46 GMT+00:00 2004
Whois database was last updated on: Thu Mar 31 13:14:23 GMT 2005
I do...
.us domain name and create something that looks real. Especially because we already have official pages under the [statecode].us pages.
But I see your point. Imagine that I could take a
I guess we don't want "attorneygeneral.calif.us" to be a phishing site asking people to sign up for identity theft protection.
Get your Unix fortune now!
This has NOTHING to do with spam or spammers.
A Mailboxes, Etc. address is just as anonymous as a fake address.
If you really need to know the contact information, you can subpoena the billing information for the domain. That can NOT be forged, unless the owner also wants to do time for credit card fraud.
These sort of rules only inconvenience ordinary people, who wish to remain anonymous for one reason or another.
My reason to always put fake info (it looks real though) in my domain registrations is that I don't want the net.kooks come knock on my door every time they get upset about what I publish on the websites. If they want to contact me, they either use email or subpoena the billing info (which is not fake).
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
Surely if you want to appear affiliated with the US govt then you should use a .gov address. My belief was that having a .us address meant that you were situated in the US; following the ISO 3166 country codes. I understand of course this is not strictly adhered to but perhaps it would be worth opening the debate again? After all, I'm in the UK and we mess it up by using .uk instead of .gb (anybody know how that came about?) , and nobody minded me registering .com and .org addresses even though I gave a UK address when registering.
The constitutional right to privacy in the United States springs from an interpretation of the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure combined with the et-cetera clauses in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
The thing that aggravated me about godaddy's letter (yeah, I got that email too) is that there is absolutely NO information directly from the NTIA about what the policy is, says, how it was arrived at, what the goal is, or when they believe the results will be. This petition drive has thus far been a completely one-sided story. As a result, I have to think that anyone who would sign the petition, save those that have managed to dig up more info that I have, are just drinking the koolaid.
.us domains. Shame on them if they failed to inform the registrants that a proxy registration of a .us domain was technically a violation of NTIA policy. If they did inform registrants, then the registrants should have seen this coming.
I will fault NTIA for apparently having no mention of the policy on their website (at least last time I checked yesterday). There's no rational reason for them to either set new policy like this or start enforcing existing policy without hearings or public comment. It's even less excuable that after the fact they won't provide their side of the story. They refused comment in the couple of media stories I saw about this.
By the way, that's right, it's not a new policy, it's enforcement of a previously unenforced existing policy. So for that, I think some blame may lay on the registrars who allowed proxy registrations for
My inbox and referrer logs are full of spam from holders of .us registrations - to the point that I've considered just blocking the entire TLD. If it were harder to cover your tracks when making a domain registration, then it'd be easier for me to take holders of domains seriously.
You don't need an anonymous domain registration to run an anonymous Web site. You don't need a domain registration to run a Web site at all. Domain registrations aren't anonymous anyway - your information is still vulnerable to subpoena and other legal threats, so those who really need anonymity have always had to use other techniques to get it. The whole point of registering a domain is to allow people to have a way of contacting you; it's the opposite of anonymity.
Before signing the petition, I hope you'll consider that the people anonymous registration benefits are primarily spammers - not the friendly Libertarians next door.
The spammers/phishers/etc. just register a domain with a stolen credit card and give false whois info. They'll continue to do so in fact, this won't affect them. It will affect those trying to avoid the spammers (that's why I registered my domains privately, I have to pay extra for the privledge in fact) and those who need privacy (rape victims, stalker victims, etc.)
The ironic part is, anyone saying this is going to stop spammers from sending spam, IS WRONG. Spam is mostly send from over-seas servers and enters the US from, you guessed it, a big fat internet pipeline. Sure, the spammers might get a phone call or two, but the spamming won't stop.
As for providing false information, an article on the CircleID website quotes, "It is now illegal to provide false information when registering a domain name." It goes on to say, "Last year, there was a brief attempt to make registrars responsible for the accuracy of the Whois database. Fortunately, that legislation failed. What did become law was a new, stiff penalty (7 years) for providing false WHOIS information. While this looming jail time might have some sway over US-based crooks, it will do little to get accurate information from those who live overseas." As I mentioned before, this is merely a flesh-wound in stopping the spam-war.
My greatest fear is having someone show up on my doorstep with intent to harm my family, property, or myself because that person wants my domain name. And as it seems with almost every law in America, it takes spilled blood to have those laws abolished or less, modified in some feeble attempt to make a slight few of us happy.
What needs to happen is the placement of an organization who tracks the "licensing" of domains and their registrants. If I were to require contact with a site operator, I would first have to call them to obtain contact information, however, that information would be limited to a mailing address, NOT a home address, name, phone number, and email.
Registration would require a name and a mailing address (NOT a home address). If a mailing address is not possible, then a phone number and email may be relinquished by the domain host. The registrant has the option of unlisting this information completely, however, contact/complaints must be made through the organization. A failure to comply with requests from the organization within 30 calendar days would ultimately mean a "freeze" on the domain. After 90 days (60 days from the beginning of a domain freeze), the domain is wiped off the face of the internet. This should light a fire under anyone's ass.
This may not sound like the most 'perfect' plan, though is a lot better than what's in place now. And you may be thinking, "we already have an organization that does that," but no, ICANN functions like a cat, lying around all day, looking pretty, propping up a leg in the corner of the room to lick itself and essentially, just look pretty. We need an organization that isn't afraid of grabbing some sack to make things happen.
-- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!
Do you own a car? If so then you are part of the automotive infrastructure of whatever state/country you live in. What would you say if a government agency unilaterally required that all members of the automotive infrastructure post their name, address and telephone number in big bold letters on all their vehicles? That way all the other members of the automotive infrastructure can clearly see your identity so that if/when you cause problems, you can be contacted. Sound good to you? It must because that's exactly what you're condoning for the owners of .us TLDs.
This is not 1988. The Internet can't be summed up in a hosts file. Get your head out of the glory days of the past and join the rest of us in the real world.
Just FYI, I'm a professional sysadmin and have been doing it a long time. Your comments about 'running toy servers' are a cheap shot and misdirected.
Very simply, you don't EVER need to know who and what I am, simply because I own a domain. You just don't. A domain is not IP space. And even if I DO have IP space, if you have a problem with an attack coming from that space, you can contact my ISP, who maintains records and can contact me, likely within minutes. If you have a complaint about the domain, then you can contact my registrar. (not sure how long that takes... but if it's not involving a specific IP, it's highly unlikely to be an emergency.) You can also email me directly via the Namecheap anonymous relay. Those three contact methods are enough. You don't need anything more than that.
The alternative is that you can contact me in ways I don't approve of and can't control. Probably any address listed in the WHOIS is going to be a good target for breakin, for instance -- probably going to be more tech goodies there than most places. And, of course, if you happen to disagree with something I'm saying, you can find out precisely what window to throw a brick through.
A domain is not automatically IP space, and it's not automatically a server. Requiring non-anonymous domain registrations shows poor thinking, a fundamental confusion over how the Internet works. It's IP SPACE that matters, not domains.
Typically, the only reason individuals want their own second-level DNS domain is vanity.
.us domain, how can we ever expect that to be true of a .cn (China) domain? Americans hold the U.S. to be a shining example of freedom, but clearly .us is not an example of freedom.
So what? If I'm willing to pay money for a product for my own vanity, and someone is willing to sell it, that's what commerce is all about. Should I not be allowed to anonymously purchase a mirror at the store for my purposes of vanity?
If you're going to connect infrastructure to the Internet, you should be prepared to announce your identity to the rest of the Internet so that if/when you cause problems, you can be contacted.
Says who? All Internet users connect our infrastructure to the Internet every single time we access the Internet, which is 24/7 for a big chunk of the public. That doesn't mean that everyone connecting to the Internet should be identifiable. That would be absolute insanity. Part of what I enjoy about the Internet is being able to do things freely without concern that I am identifiable.
If you don't want to connect infrastructure to the Internet, and just want an outlet for your speech, again, there are plenty of ways to do that that don't involve your own little DNS domain.
So what? Just because there are alternative mediums doesn't make it okay. The Internet is clearly the single most useful medium for the average person to disseminate information. It is very important that a person be comfortable using the medium without fear of identification. Only then do you have true freedom of speech on the Internet.
If we cannot expect total freedom on a
First, in these days of whackers (script kiddie hackers cracking with one hand, stroking themselves over free porn with the other), spam-masters, and other assorted cretins and weasels, what is the point of allowing secret domain registrations? OF COURSE there should be accountability.
Second, if you really need to publish anonymously for whistle-blower reasons, et al, then between open proxies and nym and mixmaster, it ain't hard to put out what you need anonymously. But domain registrations? Come on, we have bigger and more realistic fish to fry in the world of privacy than that.
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
The flaw in your analysis is that you fail to take into account the economic cost of locating the personal information.
A whois query costs seconds. A qwuery to the DMV can be minutes, hours, or even days (DMVs are state agencies, and there are varying levels of response from the various states).
To take your analogy to an extreme, I will suggest that we are all millionaires. Some people can and withdraw $1 million from an account, while others must work 50 years to earn a total of $1 million. Nevertheless, in both cases, people have possession of $1 million. The difference, of course, is the cost in time.
I got the same letter from GoDaddy (former customer, love how they don't let me unsubscribe without snail-mail), but though I am a HUGE believer in privacy/speech rights, I had a different reaction to it:
.US TLD, a limited (if artificial) resource, just like frequency spectrum, real estate, game animals, trademarks, etc. You are trading some public registration information for a monopoly on a domain name. Get over it.
2 864defd-c34b-403b-a789-6172ffe61186
1. This is only the
2. If you have a legitimate need to be private, don't register a domain name. Not all URLs must be in the form "www\.[^.]{3,}\.us".
3. GoDaddy makes a FREAKING CRAPLOAD of money with their "unlisted" domain "feature." Even if there are NO spammers among their customers, GoDaddy has a huge incentive to spread FUD about information anyone could find in a phone book anyway.
More on my blog:
http://www.tallent.us/blog/CommentView.aspx?guid=
If the domain reserved for a country shouldn't be run by the government of that country, who the hell should run it?
The government makes decisions like this. If you like the decisions, you vote for the same people next time. If you don't, you vote for somebody else. If most of the people who vote disagree with you, you cowboy up and live with it, or move.
Use a different domain if you want to be anonymous.
For those of you who failed miserably at catching the satire in this, let me explain it.
I strongly disagree with the precedent this decision will set. As a strong believer in personal privacy, and an avid internet user, the thought that my personal information would be freely available to any person connected to the internet is scary.
I make the false assumption that by being on the internet, my information is available to everyone.
Leaving information such as my name, address, and telephone number open to the general public (and not just my fellow Americans, either) puts me at great risk of becoming a victim of identity theft, internet scams, computer hackers, and even terrorism.
First, this is information which is generally available freely in a phone book, in online directories, and any number of other places. Should I choose to remain unlisted, I can pay a small fee or buy a mobile phone. Should I choose to remain unlisted in the .us registry, I can buy a different domain name which doesn't have such draconian terms imposed upon it, or write an angry letter to my congressman (which I certainly have done, though it's not quite as it appears here ;). Secondly, it's quite typical of today's sensationalist media to make references to terrorism where it's pretty much irrelevant.
Please reconsider this decision, for my sake, and yours. It is in everyone's best interests to allow those who want to keep their information private to do so.
This part is true.
I firmly believe in the tenets on which this country was founded: truth, justice, and the American way.
Did nobody catch the reference to Superman?
This decision is anathema to these core American beliefs, and goes against the teachings of the Holy Father. He would certainly not like to see His children harmed through inaction by the representatives of His children.
Typical appeal to patriotism, and religious scare tactics.
AND THE HOLY FIRES OF HEAVEN WILL RAIN DOWN UPON THEE, O CONGRESSMAN!
AND IF THE SUPERMAN REFERENCE DIDN'T TIP YOU OFF, PERHAPS THIS ABOVE SENTENCE SHOULD HAVE!