Slashdot Mirror
VeriSign Wants Ability To Suspend Domains Without Court Order
GeorgeK writes "VeriSign, the monopoly registry operator for .com/.net domain names, has submitted a proposal to ICANN (PDF) describing an 'Anti-Abuse' policy. If allowed to proceed with such a policy, they would become judge, jury and executioner, with the ability to suspend or even cancel alleged 'abusive' domain names without due process for registrants. The proposal even recognizes that legitimate domain names may be taken down improperly, and offers a 'protest' procedure. However, VeriSign does not appear to offer any ability to protest an accusation of abuse before the suspension or cancellation. They intend to 'shoot first and ask questions later.'"
...this presents no opportunities for abuse.
Governments and corporations keep leapfrogging each other as the biggest threat to the Internet. How are we supposed to know which threat to focus on dammit!
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I'm sure they will offer a service where your domain is "Pre-Verified" and not subject to abuse takedowns... For $1,000 per year, of course.
The ______ Agenda
Doesn't matter if the original owner doesn't want to sell, for a price it can be made available.
Many of these abusive domains are very fleeting and transient designed to live for just a few hours. If you want due process, it has to come before the registration. So domain name registration would then follow guidelines similar to Trade Mark and other corporation registration rules. It would slow down the registration process a lot and impact the fees Verisign is currently collecting. The domain name abuse is getting to be very bad, and it could trigger legislation. Legislation by the congress critters who imagine internet to be a series of tubes would put onerous burdens in the registrants and the registrars. So it is heading it off at the pass.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I think it's time for Anonymous to take down Verisign...
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
I am asking for such powers. Just because I asked for it, does not mean I will get it.
That should provide robust protections for, oh, anybody who can afford a protracted legal battle... Shouldn't be a problem.
Seriously, as if they wouldn't abuse their position, yet again...
Loading...
IF they make Digital trespass, I.E. cracking into any company's servers and DDOS attacks legal activity. I fully support them being able to do DNS resolution Attacks on their customers.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
They intend to 'shoot first and ask questions later.'
This is helpful for potential malware/virus/etc sites - take it down NOW and address afterwards. As long as the ones taking the deactivation move witness it themselves, it's doable.
The problem comes with reports. Let's say you get 100 reports of a domain being a nasty one in a 5-minute period of time. You just *wham-bam* take that domain down without looking at it and you could have just been the worst link in a staged act chain.
I'm not trying to be an ass, but I'm posting what I witness daily: Everyone wants to save money, including big companies. If VeriSign were to have this ability (along with other TLD registrars), then they will likely want to automate everything they can. See paragraph 2 above.
Don't we have laws and such against these? For what reason is this company still whole?
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
$1k/year? Can I get your Verisign rep's number?
See. If you 'let it be' and everything becomes private, you end up in that situation - private parties, on which you have no rights over, decide how you live your life. what you hear, what you can know.
Read radical news here
Add in the fact that they'll probably start slipping forced arbitration clauses in their contracts like a lot of companies are doing and I can't see this going wrong at all
What's the process to report an abusive domain? I've taken as much abuse from these people as I can stand. I'd like to report verisign.com
Are you suggesting that a kangaroo court where one of the parties gets to hire the judge, there is no jury, no record of the proceedings, and no requirement that the decision be made in line with settled law isn't Fair, Just, and Efficient?
Some people just hate America, I guess, can't reason with 'em...
Thanks for accepting the article. ICANN is still reviewing the proposal. If folks share my concerns, please do send them your comments by emailing registryservice@icann.org (from the top of ICANN's Registry Services Evaluation Process page). You can view comments by others here. EasyDNS has submitted their concerns too.
At a minimum, they should open up a formal 30 day public comment period that is widely advertised, in order that domain name registrants can be heard.
... in countries where the government-licensed utilities already have this power.
If TLD management were split among countries, so that Verisign handled .com and .net for US-based companies and foreign subsidiaries or foreign registrars handled it in foreign countries, then this kind of power might make sense for some foreign subsidiaries of Verisign or for some foreign registrars.
As for companies based the United States who use a domain registrar in the United States, yanking a domain name without a court order insults the Constitution.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
If ICANN wouldn't tear those TLDs out of Verisign's hands despite the fact that they basically broke DNS (and a bunch of other things, most infamously a lot of SMTP anti-spam measures) with their "Site Finder" service, I doubt very much that there's anything Verisign could do right now that would compel ICANN to go after them again.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Just say no to idiocy. I hope their "proposal" is rejected as the bad idea that it is. Mind you, it just encourages me and everyone else to dump this monopoly in favour of other ones that are less obnoxious. I.e. other domain registries e.g. country codes or .org or whatever.
It will be a mandated purchase, for $499.00, with cost savings to make that $599.00, you cocksmoking occupiers!
This is my sig.
You clearly didn't read the linked PDF file...
(c) to avoid any liability, civil or criminal, on the part of Verisign, as well as its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, directors, and
employees;
They won't start slipping in forced arbitration clauses because they're already in there. They literally stated that the new policies are meant to avoid any liability for their actions.
I propose that they should not only implement this idea, but to track down the offenders and subject them to a gratuitous full body cavity search. You should be glad they won't need or require your consent, as this will be for your own good.
They cannot be shut down, nor stopped. That is a wonderful thing - as long as a government has the ability to do something, it will find a way to use it to the detriment of its people. The best way to fight that is to remove the weapon from their insane fingers...
VeriSign now is the government?
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Anyone who thinks this won't be used to either bully the little guy into giving up his domain for corporations or just milk more money from customers is being very naive.
If you sum the number of days in each step of the Uniform domain name dispute resolution policy you quickly see that it can take tens of days to get a malicious domain shutdown. ICANN has long been in need of the ability to quickly react to burgeoning threats and though the ambiguity of the policy as described is concerning it's not without merits.
Verisign wants all your base are belong to us
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Q: Were consultations with end users appropriate? Which groups were consulted? What were the nature and content of these consultations? .com/.net/.name domain names.
A: As a registry operator, Verisign did not consult with the registrants of
Verisign is trying to expand their central but minor role as a registry operator into control of the whole system. Their agreement with ICANN expires on November 30, 2012, and, ICANN could choose to get another registry operator. Right now, no proprietary technology or big staff is needed to be the registry operator. This added complication would make it tougher for ICANN to switch registry operators.
So that's why they're doing this.
No, it shows that you have a really childish view of the world and you need to grow up.
I effect Verizon EVERY FUCKING DAY by not paying them a god damn dime. There are legitimate ways to deal with businesses, and there are childish, obnoxious and criminal ways to deal with someone. I choose the former, and you're too ignorant to know the difference between it and the latter. The thing is, Verizon ISN'T THAT BAD, because people still give them business BY CHOICE.
The difference is, the issue thats got your panties half a meter up your twat isn't really that big of an issue to those of us who actually have shit to do other than rage against the machine and fuck up shit for other people.
You'll figure it out sometime after you get out of school and actually have to function in the real world where this kind of childish bullshit does nothing but get in your way. Anonymous has yet to affect ANY CHANGE AT ALL. The best they've done is bring attention to their douche-bagged-ness. They didn't hurt Amazon, they didn't hurt Visa, they haven't hurt anyone, if anything, they've given free advertising to these companies. You're just too young and ignorant to realize they are experiencing the Streisand effect.
Every mature person in the world sees it, just not angsty teenagers. As I said, after you grow up a bit, you'll get it, until then, no one will convince you otherwise.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
and the interests behind this will be as stupid as to not pursue any further avenue to censor is it. are you forgetting that icann is a private american corporation, and currently holds domain name system ?
Read radical news here
Money directly causes lack of consequences, or ameliorates them, often significantly. Therefore, money does corrupt. Power likewise.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The whole certificate process is flawed, instead we should just have a way of proving that the authoritative dns servers of a domain agree a web site is the legitimate one. This can be done with public keys and crypto fingerprints. No need to pay the kind of scum that runs Verisign (the company that broke the internet one day with their money grubbing schemes) any money.