This is after, they wait 2 weeks. What would be even better, is to put their real information -- from the billing (if not a stolen credit card) and have the domain name suspended.
One, the phone numbers 555-555-5555 or 111-111-1111 and that ilk. Two, a corporation name that is not listed in that state's corporate database (where that is available online). Three, the registrar does have the billing information on the credit card that may not match. Four, Mapquest for invalid addresses, ie. 725 Border St, E. Boston, MA 02128 (street number does not exist, or state name not in that city). And the USPS.gov site for zipcodes being wrong.
I sued Moniker for providing WHOIS privacy for e360 and Linhardt (http://www.barbieslapp.com/spam/e360/timeline.htm) along with e360 and Linhardt for illegal spamming.
Not only does this hide the information on the spammer, it also prevents you from determining if the 1000s of domains are one spammer to 1000 different spammers. That can be avoid by saying, Moniker Privacy Services, Client 12. Where 12 is some form of account number that says that may not relate to the actual system account number, but enable to the viewer to determine that there are XX domains by the same person.
Now lets take this out of the spam arena. I have a business of selling widgets. I also have a blog that 'reviews' widgets, and I have three blogs pretending to be 3 separate people bitching about X Widgets where X is one of my three competitors.
First you don't define what you mean by a large number. You apparently don't understand legal process. You get a subpoena some time AFTER filing a lawsuit, in Federal Court, it is a rule 16 conference. Lets say I am in California and you are in Florida, and your registrar is Godaddy (if your registrar is overseas, they may not even respond). On your blog, you falsely post that I was drunk, crashed into your car, offered you cocaine, and pushed you into a ditch and drove off. I filed suit here in California, then have to file a special motion for early discovery so that I can issue a subpoena upon Godaddy. Now Godaddy charges me $150 for responding to the subpoena. Now, I served you with the complaint, and you file a motion to dismiss claiming that you are in Florida so that the California Court has no jurisdiction over you.
If you own a house, this ownership information is public. I can walk into the county recorder (in most places in the USA) and find out who owns that house.
The people with bad intentions should quickly lose their domains. This is an enforcement issue and I have been talking about it with the RAA group.
To correctly do whois, there must be some changes to the Whois to work.
For those people who use Fake information, they need to lose their domain names. 3.7.7.2 states that a registrar may cancel a registration when there is intentionally false information given. This is rarely enforced. (see http://www.icann.org/correspondence/touton-letter-to-beckwith-03sep02.htm). In fact, I was told by a person at ICANN (I shall allow her to remain nameless, for now -- but for those who were at the IP meeting on Tuesday, she was sitting next to me) that there is no provision for punishing a registrar, except by terminating them and ICANN does not want to terminate registrars because all of them do not have a good data escrow in place. (think registerfly). I believe this is incorrect. I believe that suspending a registrar's ability to prevent NEW registrations by a registrar would be within the ability of the contract and not harm any domain registrant.
Many registrars give 15 days (the period for mistakenly false information, ie. typo, aged, etc.). What needs to be done is to suspend the domain name, for intentionally false false information, for this 15 day period. And then when they provide updated information, this updated information MUST be proven to be correct (ie. don't change 123 Yellow brick Road to 123 Main Street, Oz, Kansas.) and allow the registrar to charge a reasonable administrative fee.
By allowing registrars to ignore invalid whois and complaints regarding such leads to the argument that since the all data is not correct, that the Whois should be scrapped.
If you run a business in most USA jurisdictions, not under your own name you are required to list the name and your information with the government. If you are a corporation, you are required file with the Secretary of State. If you operating as a DBA (doing business as, or fictitious name) you are required to at least register with your city or County with that name. Typically, you are required to place an announcement in the newspaper prior to using the name,
The problem with this is that you cannot be served with a lawsuit at a P.O. Box. Furthermore, if you are not using a real name, how do I know you are a hardcore spammer sending spam using bunches of anonymously registered domain names as opposed to one misguided business owner that typed in my e-mail address from a web site that I posted a comment on?
I am suing (http://www.barbieslapp.com/spam/e360/timeline.htm) Moniker for providing anonymous whois to David Linhardt (http://www.spamhaus.org/organization/statement.lasso?ref=3).
Moniker has been providing Linhardt/e360Insight, with hundreds of anonymous domain names. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to determine which domains are his. With anonymous registration you cannot tell if the 1000 of spam you received today are from 1000 different companies that may have mistakenly added you to their list or from one hardcore spammer.
Legitimate businesses have no reason to hide their identity.
If you do business, people have a right to know who they are doing business with!
Two things, lets say Microsoft has a pro-windows or anti-Linux blog talking about how their company found that many Linux distros contain trojans. Now lets say these blogs are done with anonymous registration?
I remember a compiler comparison in Info world. The text of the review did not match the score card. I spoke with the author and found out that the scorecard he submitted was different from what was published. The scores apparently were based on the amount of advertising purchased by the compiler vendor. While doing some writing for the DPMA and BCS, I got a little swag (along the lines of free software). I did attend a few presentations with nice meals for the press.
It didn't effect my reviews or commentary. I still slammed the companies I got freebies from.
In San Antonio, TX I was pulled over for doing 76 in a 75 zone. I successfully argued that the GPS was more accurate than the RADAR, when I said that it used "government satellite signals."
In fact, most police radar units are +/- 3mph. A consumer GPS speed indicator is typically accurate to within.75 mph.
When working in ship navigation systems (Laser Plot), I was involved in dumping track information from a ship to show that it was not in an area when a boating accident occurred.
The hacking issue is correct, one can always hack the data. The Cop can lie about the reading on the radar unit too. If it gets to 'real court' you have the standard issues of scientific reliability (Daubert test) and the authenticity of the data. In the late 90s, there was a case (in Georgia, I think) where a speeding conviction was thrown out because there was no reliability of the laser speed testing introduced.
You must be a communist^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hterrorist if you do not trust the government. The government is here to help you. Only a terrorist would doubt the government.
If you are not a criminal, what would you have to worry about??? They say only the police will be able to have it activated, so what is to worry about?? A government approved system is always secure.
My experience with an offshore project didn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling. Despite several e-mails where I even wrote pseudo code to explain the algorithm for audio gain scaling, they still didn't understand. I just wrote the code and e-mailed them the code.
The issue with spaghetti may also occur with RentACoder. Spaghetti code is not just an offshore option.
There are many languages that are spoken, not written. It is passed from generation to generation. I met with a Professor Lori Levin at CMU. She was involved in a project to preserve these languages.
Back at Aspen Technology, I was working with the IRMA card. They provided source code (In C)for their file transfer code for $100. I tried their code and found really dumbass bugs, such as: int wait_x(int milsec)
But, when they didn't want it to wait, they would would call wait_x().
When I wrote a list of bugs, it was 3 pages, single spaced.
When at Microsystems Software, there were functions named, "we_are_fucked" and comments that said, "I know this is crap, but Dick wanted this now. I'll fix this later."
Oh? I hope you posted that because it's the first method of revenge that came to mind. Can you imagine what that would really mean? I'd be at the front of the people ranting when that article hit slashdot.
We're not talking about the "fire missile" function on a jet-fighter, we're talking about a free(...) and dealloc(...). Do you want to see every Auto maker sued if they don't squeeze EVERY FRACTION of an mile out of a gallon of gasoline? SUED?
How many automakers say, "we don't warranty that your vehicle will do anything?"
This is the type of attitude that is a problem. Lets make your analogy a little more accurate. Every time you press the brake pedal, the return spring does not work properly causing the car's brake pad rubs the disk a little more so that after a few days, your brake is always sticking -- or until you pull the wheel off and manually pull it back.
It is because people accept poor programming as the norm. Oh, yeah, just reboot it and it'll be fine.
I consult for someone who uses ACT! 2005. When they got the upgrade notice, they asked me to check it out. I spoke to ACT! support and they told me "We improved performance by releasing resources that we are no longer using." I said, "THAT IS A BUG FIX!" Anybody writing code outside of school should be doing it, and if I was grading their code, I would take points off for that.
I'd like to see some of these software companies that do this get sued for such poor coding practices.
I believe them. For months, they said that my system was hacked and the custom e-mail addressed used by them must have been signed up with someone else and that is how the spammers got my address.
Slashdot Mirror
This is after, they wait 2 weeks. What would be even better, is to put their real information -- from the billing (if not a stolen credit card) and have the domain name suspended.
One, the phone numbers 555-555-5555 or 111-111-1111 and that ilk. Two, a corporation name that is not listed in that state's corporate database (where that is available online). Three, the registrar does have the billing information on the credit card that may not match. Four, Mapquest for invalid addresses, ie. 725 Border St, E. Boston, MA 02128 (street number does not exist, or state name not in that city). And the USPS.gov site for zipcodes being wrong.
I sued Moniker for providing WHOIS privacy for e360 and Linhardt (http://www.barbieslapp.com/spam/e360/timeline.htm) along with e360 and Linhardt for illegal spamming.
Not only does this hide the information on the spammer, it also prevents you from determining if the 1000s of domains are one spammer to 1000 different spammers. That can be avoid by saying, Moniker Privacy Services, Client 12. Where 12 is some form of account number that says that may not relate to the actual system account number, but enable to the viewer to determine that there are XX domains by the same person.
Now lets take this out of the spam arena. I have a business of selling widgets. I also have a blog that 'reviews' widgets, and I have three blogs pretending to be 3 separate people bitching about X Widgets where X is one of my three competitors.
First you don't define what you mean by a large number. You apparently don't understand legal process. You get a subpoena some time AFTER filing a lawsuit, in Federal Court, it is a rule 16 conference. Lets say I am in California and you are in Florida, and your registrar is Godaddy (if your registrar is overseas, they may not even respond). On your blog, you falsely post that I was drunk, crashed into your car, offered you cocaine, and pushed you into a ditch and drove off. I filed suit here in California, then have to file a special motion for early discovery so that I can issue a subpoena upon Godaddy. Now Godaddy charges me $150 for responding to the subpoena. Now, I served you with the complaint, and you file a motion to dismiss claiming that you are in Florida so that the California Court has no jurisdiction over you.
If you own a house, this ownership information is public. I can walk into the county recorder (in most places in the USA) and find out who owns that house.
The people with bad intentions should quickly lose their domains. This is an enforcement issue and I have been talking about it with the RAA group.
To correctly do whois, there must be some changes to the Whois to work.
For those people who use Fake information, they need to lose their domain names. 3.7.7.2 states that a registrar may cancel a registration when there is intentionally false information given. This is rarely enforced. (see http://www.icann.org/correspondence/touton-letter-to-beckwith-03sep02.htm). In fact, I was told by a person at ICANN (I shall allow her to remain nameless, for now -- but for those who were at the IP meeting on Tuesday, she was sitting next to me) that there is no provision for punishing a registrar, except by terminating them and ICANN does not want to terminate registrars because all of them do not have a good data escrow in place. (think registerfly). I believe this is incorrect. I believe that suspending a registrar's ability to prevent NEW registrations by a registrar would be within the ability of the contract and not harm any domain registrant.
Many registrars give 15 days (the period for mistakenly false information, ie. typo, aged, etc.). What needs to be done is to suspend the domain name, for intentionally false false information, for this 15 day period. And then when they provide updated information, this updated information MUST be proven to be correct (ie. don't change 123 Yellow brick Road to 123 Main Street, Oz, Kansas.) and allow the registrar to charge a reasonable administrative fee.
By allowing registrars to ignore invalid whois and complaints regarding such leads to the argument that since the all data is not correct, that the Whois should be scrapped.
If you run a business in most USA jurisdictions, not under your own name you are required to list the name and your information with the government. If you are a corporation, you are required file with the Secretary of State. If you operating as a DBA (doing business as, or fictitious name) you are required to at least register with your city or County with that name. Typically, you are required to place an announcement in the newspaper prior to using the name,
The problem with this is that you cannot be served with a lawsuit at a P.O. Box. Furthermore, if you are not using a real name, how do I know you are a hardcore spammer sending spam using bunches of anonymously registered domain names as opposed to one misguided business owner that typed in my e-mail address from a web site that I posted a comment on?
I am suing (http://www.barbieslapp.com/spam/e360/timeline.htm) Moniker for providing anonymous whois to David Linhardt (http://www.spamhaus.org/organization/statement.lasso?ref=3).
Moniker has been providing Linhardt/e360Insight, with hundreds of anonymous domain names. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to determine which domains are his. With anonymous registration you cannot tell if the 1000 of spam you received today are from 1000 different companies that may have mistakenly added you to their list or from one hardcore spammer.
Legitimate businesses have no reason to hide their identity.
If you do business, people have a right to know who they are doing business with!
Two things, lets say Microsoft has a pro-windows or anti-Linux blog talking about how their company found that many Linux distros contain trojans. Now lets say these blogs are done with anonymous registration?
Is this kosher?
I remember a compiler comparison in Info world. The text of the review did not match the score card. I spoke with the author and found out that the scorecard he submitted was different from what was published. The scores apparently were based on the amount of advertising purchased by the compiler vendor. While doing some writing for the DPMA and BCS, I got a little swag (along the lines of free software). I did attend a few presentations with nice meals for the press.
It didn't effect my reviews or commentary. I still slammed the companies I got freebies from.
The accuracy is based on the specifications of the unit.
I meant El Paso. I don't know why I typed San Antonio.
I used the GPS defense when pulled over.
.75 mph.
In San Antonio, TX I was pulled over for doing 76 in a 75 zone. I successfully argued that the GPS was more accurate than the RADAR, when I said that it used "government satellite signals."
In fact, most police radar units are +/- 3mph. A consumer GPS speed indicator is typically accurate to within
When working in ship navigation systems (Laser Plot), I was involved in dumping track information from a ship to show that it was not in an area when a boating accident occurred.
The hacking issue is correct, one can always hack the data. The Cop can lie about the reading on the radar unit too. If it gets to 'real court' you have the standard issues of scientific reliability (Daubert test) and the authenticity of the data. In the late 90s, there was a case (in Georgia, I think) where a speeding conviction was thrown out because there was no reliability of the laser speed testing introduced.
You must be a communist^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hterrorist if you do not trust the government. The government is here to help you. Only a terrorist would doubt the government.
If you are not a criminal, what would you have to worry about??? They say only the police will be able to have it activated, so what is to worry about?? A government approved system is always secure.
My experience with an offshore project didn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling. Despite several e-mails where I even wrote pseudo code to explain the algorithm for audio gain scaling, they still didn't understand. I just wrote the code and e-mailed them the code.
The issue with spaghetti may also occur with RentACoder. Spaghetti code is not just an offshore option.
There are many languages that are spoken, not written. It is passed from generation to generation. I met with a Professor Lori Levin at CMU. She was involved in a project to preserve these languages.
Back at Aspen Technology, I was working with the IRMA card. They provided source code (In C)for their file transfer code for $100. I tried their code and found really dumbass bugs, such as:
int wait_x(int milsec)
But, when they didn't want it to wait, they would would call wait_x().
When I wrote a list of bugs, it was 3 pages, single spaced.
When at Microsystems Software, there were functions named, "we_are_fucked" and comments that
said, "I know this is crap, but Dick wanted this now. I'll fix this later."
That was 3 years after that programmer left.
How many automakers say, "we don't warranty that your vehicle will do anything?"
This is the type of attitude that is a problem. Lets make your analogy a little more accurate. Every time you press the brake pedal, the return spring does not work properly causing the car's brake pad rubs the disk a little more so that after a few days, your brake is always sticking -- or until you pull the wheel off and manually pull it back.
It is because people accept poor programming as the norm. Oh, yeah, just reboot it and it'll be fine.
I consult for someone who uses ACT! 2005. When they got the upgrade notice, they asked me to check it out. I spoke to ACT! support and they told me "We improved performance by releasing resources that we are no longer using." I said, "THAT IS A BUG FIX!" Anybody writing code outside of school should be doing it, and if I was grading their code, I would take points off for that.
I'd like to see some of these software companies that do this get sued for such poor coding practices.
In fact, if it happens again it will be an easier win. This time he can argue that it is not a simple mistake.
Soon, we will be getting spam pumping SCOX.pk.
The question is, will the the SCO management be the ones sending out the spam?
I believe them. For months, they said that my system was hacked and the custom e-mail addressed used by them must have been signed up with someone else and that is how the spammers got my address.
Yep, I believe them. 110%.
Their new spokesman is Harcourt Fenton Mudd.
Now comes the MPAA and RIAA asking for damages and injunctive relief.
This speed and storage capacity and can only be used for downloading and pirating illegal copies of movies and music.
Therefore this must not be permitted to happen.