June 2010 - NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Who Is Blocking WHOIS? Part 2
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn June 29, 2010

June 29, 2010

At-Large, ALAC, et al, We wanted to follow up specifically on the issue of WHOIS access and add data to our previous column Who Is Blocking WHOIS?(http://www.circleid.com/posts/who_is_blocking_whois/) which covered Registrar denial of their contracted obligation to support Port 43 WHOIS access. Here, we will dig even deeper to reveal specific manipulation of the system. In one of the most egregious examples A Technology Company Inc has been blocking WHOIS access to their own operational domain, namesystem.com. Try doing a WHOIS look-up of namesystem.com and you will receive the message: "Sorry, Domain does not exist in the null system". However, even Internic records that namesystem.com is registered through NameSystem (http://reports.internic.net/cgi/whois?whois_nic=namesystem.com&type=domain) The odd thing is that all other WHOIS lookups work in whois.namesystem.com, it is just their domain which is hidden completely. ICANN terminated this Registrar and applaud them for it (http://www.icann.org/correspondence/burnette-to-prakash-25jun10-en.pdf) but they were terminated for non-payment of fees not blocking WHOIS access. We have in many cases linked Registrar malfeasance and WHOIS obfuscation to spam and illicit pharmacy traffic. Here we provide an excellent example. We pulled a random spam sample from our collection which advertized the site sekudsov[DOT]com which had no content except a link to highmedcenter[DOT]com. Highmedcenter is an illegal pharmacy sponsored by Visesh Infotecnics Ltd. d/b/a signdomains.com, and this is where the investigation ends because Visesh Infotecnics has turned off their WHOIS engine completely. Attempting to perform a look up on Highmedcenter produces this message: “Unable to connect to the specified registry whois.signdomains.com.” This has been the case for several days. We have filed a complaint about this with ICANN. http://www.knujon.com/news.html#06272010 In Belgium last week we presented these dire contractual breaches at the Whois Data Accuracy Study Workshop http://brussels38.icann.org/node/12495 and pointed out that we need to take a step back to see if it is even possible to get to the WHOIS records before we can even worry about their accuracy. Some Registrars have found a way to obfuscate WHOIS without completely blocking it, by providing a “domain lookup.” Domain lookups are not proper WHOIS services and violate multiple sections of the RAA():Zog Media, Inc. DBA Zog Names (zognames.com) Hosting.com, Inc., Add2Net Inc. (lunarpages.com) Bottle Domains, Inc. (bottledomains.com.au), Cheapies.com Inc. (cheapies.com) Domainz Limited (domainz.com) Nominalia Internet S.L. (nominalia.com) Sedo.com LLC (sedo.com) DomainSpa LLC (domainspa.com) Register4Less, Inc. (Register4Less.com) and Verelink, Inc. (verelink.com) all have failed to provide a real WHOIS web interface. Is this better or worse than the Registrars who have no look up at all or have buried it so deeply that Indiana Jones would not be able to find it? USA Webhost, Inc. (usawebhost.com) Verza Domain Depot BV (verzadomains.com) Premium Registrations Sweden AB (premiumregistrations.com) VentureDomains, Inc. (upc360.com) The Planet Internet Services, Inc. (theplanet.com) Digitrad France (digitrad.com) New Great Domains, Inc. (newgreatdomains.com) and Porting Access B.V.(portingxs.com) seem to have no web-based WHOIS. Are these examples better or worse than Alfena, LLC (alfena.com) NetRegistry Pty Ltd. (netregistry.com) and Autica Domain Services Inc. (autica.com) which do not supply a web WHOIS by direct the visitor to some other WHOIS utility at another site? One may complain that these Registrars are small-scale, possibly understaffed or disorganized, but we cannot say the same for NameScout, Network Solutions, eNom, Dotster, and Moniker/Oversee/Snapnames. What have these large Registrars done to obfuscate WHOIS? They have failed in their contractual obligation to provide bulk access: “3.3.6 In addition, Registrar shall provide third-party bulk access to the data subject to public access under Subsection 3.3.1 under the following terms and conditions: ... 3.3.6.1 Registrar shall make a complete electronic copy of the data available at least one (1) time per week for download by third parties who have entered into a bulk access agreement with Registrar. ... 3.3.6.2 Registrar may charge an annual fee, not to exceed US$10,000, for such bulk access to the data.” We asked NameScout about bulk access and they responded: “Unfortunately we don't offer this service.” We asked Network Solutions about bulk access and they responded: “Network Solutions does not sell bulk access to the Whois.” Perhaps eNom, Dotster, and Moniker/Oversee/Snapnames were the smart ones, they did not respond at all. As far as we are concerned they have all failed to comply with their contracts. What is really interesting is that many of the Registrars mentioned were sitting in the audience of the Whois Data Accuracy Study Workshop http://brussels38.icann.org/node/12495 and did not refute or respond to anything we presented. Another Registrar cited by us for obfuscation was Vivid Domains. It was published by domainincite.com that Vivid Domains own operational domain, vividdomains.com/, was up for sale on Sedo (http://domainincite.com/icann-registrars-domain-listed-for-sale-on-sedo/) It would be safe to say this Registrar has run to the hills but they are still listed as active by ICANN (http://www.internic.net/registrars/registrar-615.html) To quote DomainIncite: “not suggesting Vivid is dodgy, but these are the kind of clues I would use when deciding whether to give a registrar a wide berth.” We said it in the session and we will say it again. What we are seeing here is large-scale manipulation of the very fabric of the Internet for the gain of a few at the expense of the rest of us. Registrars large and small are failing to comply with the most basic conditions of their contract and so far this has slipped by ICANN. Full report: http://www.knujon.com/knujon_audit0610.pdf -Garth ------------------------------------- What is the Doomsday Book? http://knujon.com/doomsday Garth Bruen gbruen(a)knujon.com http://www.knujon.com http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 Linkedin Group: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1870205 Blog: http://www.circleid.com/members/3296/ Twitter: @Knujon

1 0

FW: ALS Application - (138) CO ISOC
by Thompson, Darlene June 25, 2010

June 25, 2010

Hi all, Please note our newest ALS applicant, the Colorado ISOC chapter. I've gone through the attached due diligence and can see nothing that would prevent them to become an ALS - they look great! We need regional advice on this so please let me know if you would like to accept this ALS and reject same. D Darlene A. Thompson CAP Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Sation 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca ________________________________ From: ICANN At-Large Staff [mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org] Sent: Wed 6/23/2010 7:03 PM To: Evan Leibovitch; Thompson, Darlene Cc: ICANN At-Large Staff Subject: ALS Application - (138) CO ISOC Dear Evan and Darlene, On the 11 May 2010 we received a North American ALS application from CO ISOC . Please find the Due Diligence form attached. We kindly ask you to provide us with the regional advice for this ALS in your capacity as NARALO Secretary. Your advice will support the ALAC review on this application. According to our timeline for ALS applications the due date for the regional advice is on 12 July 2010. We would like to remind you that the DD form could contain sensitive information. Please read the form carefully before sending it off to third parties. -- Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon, Kristina Nordström ICANN At-Large Staff

3 2

Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: ALS Application - (138) CO ISOC
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn June 25, 2010

June 25, 2010

Application looks good to me. > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [NA-Discuss] FW: ALS Application - (138) CO ISOC > From: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA> > Date: Fri, June 25, 2010 11:27 am > To: <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > > Hi all, > > Please note our newest ALS applicant, the Colorado ISOC chapter. I've gone through the attached due diligence and can see nothing that would prevent them to become an ALS - they look great! We need regional advice on this so please let me know if you would like to accept this ALS and reject same. > > D > > Darlene A. Thompson > CAP Administrator > Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP > P.O. Box 1000, Sation 910 > Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > Phone: (867) 975-5631 > Fax: (867) 975-5610 > E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > ________________________________ > > From: ICANN At-Large Staff [mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org] > Sent: Wed 6/23/2010 7:03 PM > To: Evan Leibovitch; Thompson, Darlene > Cc: ICANN At-Large Staff > Subject: ALS Application - (138) CO ISOC > > > Dear Evan and Darlene, > > On the 11 May 2010 we received a North American ALS application from CO ISOC . Please find the Due Diligence form attached. > > We kindly ask you to provide us with the regional advice for this ALS in your capacity as NARALO Secretary. Your advice will support the ALAC review on this application. > > According to our timeline for ALS applications the due date for the regional advice is on 12 July 2010. > > We would like to remind you that the DD form could contain sensitive information. Please read the form carefully before sending it off to third parties. > > -- > Regards, > > Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon, Kristina Nordström > ICANN At-Large Staff<hr>------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------

1 0

FW: [Advisors] New Tld
by Thompson, Darlene June 25, 2010

June 25, 2010

This came out of one of our local mailing lists but its an EXCELLENT video. It got me all teary being able to see you all on here since I missed you all so much. D Darlene A. Thompson CAP Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Sation 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca ________________________________ From: advisors-admin(a)tc.ca on behalf of Monique Chartrand Sent: Wed 6/23/2010 9:04 PM To: TC Advisors Subject: [Advisors] New Tld Bonjour Gareth et Evan, Nice video : http://youtu.be/f6kAint8RF4 Are we gona have our Dot Quebec soon ! Bonne St-Jean Baptiste tous ! Monique (:

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM
by Carlton Samuels June 24, 2010

June 24, 2010

I'm weighing here as Chair of the WHOIS WG. I disagree with Wendy on this matter. To my mind, this is first and foremost a matter of compliance with a solemn contract. And it plays heavily to one of the things the community has been charged to focus on per the AoC; transparency and accountability. If we think the clause does not matter, then I challenge the parties to do the honest thing and remove it from the RAA. If however, we believe like I do that the clause has a probative value, then it should be enforced and the contracted parties must ensure compliance. >From my perspective, compliance should include a requirement for accurate data. ICANN should not connive at error and enable contracted parties to generate junk data. It is quite understandable they can do it on their own. Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:20:04 -0700 > From: "Garth Bruen at KnujOn" <gbruen(a)knujon.com> > To: ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org, na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org, > David.Giza(a)icann.org > Subject: [NA-Discuss] Results of today's Port 43 Test > Message-ID: > < > 20100622162004.4ea5342b4f0c5bb9c50429b56f1eb1a7.babba9b050.wbe(a)email00.secureserver.net > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hello, > > Following up on this morning's discussion in the ALAC session on > compliance. Below is a list of Port 43 WHOIS failures. Some in the list > are recently defunct and I will have to remove them permanently. Others > are actually unknown WHOIS locations, because as we discussed in the > report the Registrars would not tell us; these are listed as failure. > > Now, we have no way of knowing for sure, but there is a slight > improvement since we released the report. 3 Registrar Port 43's that > failed in a test exactly one week ago all passed today. > > I haven't forgotten about the knujon whois util or address list for > everyone, just been busy > > > 21-domain.com FAIL > 8hy.hk FAIL > abansys.com FAIL > agip.com FAIL > antagus.de FAIL > arcticnames.com FAIL > aruba.it FAIL > atxdomains.com FAIL > austdomains.com FAIL > bestbulkregister.com FAIL > bhartiairtelservices.in FAIL > brights.jp FAIL > china.alibaba.com FAIL > chinagov.cn FAIL > chinaspringboard.com FAIL > cronon.org FAIL > cyberegistro.com FAIL > DesktopDomainer.com FAIL > df.eu FAIL > digitrad.com FAIL > direct.co.kr FAIL > dnsexit.com FAIL > Domaine.fr FAIL > domainjamboree.com FAIL > DomainLandrush.com FAIL > domainname.at FAIL > DomainRegistry.com FAIL > domainregistry.de FAIL > domains.coop FAIL > domainspa.com FAIL > domaintechnik.at FAIL > drophhub.com FAIL > francetelecom.com FAIL > geewhizdomains.com FAIL > globix.hu FAIL > hectamedia.com FAIL > hetzner.de FAIL > hostnet.com FAIL > hostway.com FAIL > humeia.com FAIL > idgenesis.com FAIL > igempresas.com FAIL > instra.com FAIL > interdomain.es FAIL > intermedia.net FAIL > intra.com FAIL > inwx.de FAIL > is.co.za FAIL > isimtescil.com FAIL > iwelt.de FAIL > key-systems.net FAIL > komplex.net FAIL > LCN.com FAIL > livedoor.com FAIL > lunarpages.com FAIL > mailclub.fr FAIL > marcaria.com FAIL > MelbourneITDBS.com FAIL > metapredict.com FAIL > mindgenies.com FAIL > namecheap.com FAIL > Nameescape.com FAIL > namefrog.com FAIL > nameshield.net FAIL > namesystem.com FAIL > net.cn FAIL > net4.in FAIL > netregistry.com FAIL > newgreatdomains.com FAIL > portingxs.com FAIL > purenic.co.jp FAIL > riktad.com FAIL > rntd.cn FAIL > sedo.com FAIL > SimplyNamed.com FAIL > smartyhost.com.au FAIL > spiritdomains.com FAIL > sundancegrp.com FAIL > sync.es FAIL > tellus.com FAIL > twt.it FAIL > uk2group.com FAIL > united-domains.de FAIL > uol.com.br FAIL > us.hooyoo.com FAIL > verelink.com FAIL > websitesource.com FAIL > wudomains.com FAIL > zzy.cn FAIL > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 04:30:31 -0400 > From: <gbruen(a)knujon.com> > To: "na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" > Subject: [NA-Discuss] Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM > in 311/312 > Message-ID: <CA818820763444599F74E141C6AED01B@theseus2PC> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Folks, > > We are proving this "Cliffs Notes" version of our WHOIS data from our > Registrar audit (http://www.knujon.com/knujon_audit0610.pdf) for today's > WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM in 311/312 > > For Web-based WHOIS access: > 11 Registrars have "look up" service instead of WHOIS > 8 have clearly non-working engines or direct the visitor to some other > WHOIS service > A Technology Co(Namesystem.com) is manipulating it's own WHOIS record, > returns: "Sorry Domain does not exist", and since we've published our report > they pulled their port 43 offline completely. Note, this was ONLY for their > domain name, all other queries worked. > > For Port-43 WHOIS Access > 30 Registrars have bad, inconsistent service > 55 would not reveal their WHOIS address > 6 gave us inaccurate data or the email to them was rejected. One > Registrar, Domain Factory, said they were not a Registrar > > For Bulk Access (RAA 3.3.6) > Namescout and Network Solutions refused to offer the service > eNom, Dotster, and Moniker did not respond to our request for > information and price for bulk download > > Registrars are restoring or maintaining domains beyond the 45 day period of > being inaccurate. > > 10 Registrars have false WHOIS for their own website domains > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 04:46:27 -0400 > From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy(a)seltzer.com> > To: gbruen(a)knujon.com > Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at > 11AM in 311/312 > Message-ID: <4C21C9E3.2020605(a)seltzer.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Too bad the session conflicts with the ongoing open GNSO Council > meeting. I'd dispute the relevance of some of these measures to ICANN, > and would argue that in many cases, no action is warranted. > > --Wendy > > On 06/23/2010 04:30 AM, gbruen(a)knujon.com wrote: > > Folks, > > > > We are proving this "Cliffs Notes" version of our WHOIS data from our > Registrar audit (http://www.knujon.com/knujon_audit0610.pdf) for today's > WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM in 311/312 > > > > For Web-based WHOIS access: > > 11 Registrars have "look up" service instead of WHOIS > > 8 have clearly non-working engines or direct the visitor to some > other WHOIS service > > A Technology Co(Namesystem.com) is manipulating it's own WHOIS > record, returns: "Sorry Domain does not exist", and since we've published > our report they pulled their port 43 offline completely. Note, this was ONLY > for their domain name, all other queries worked. > > > > For Port-43 WHOIS Access > > 30 Registrars have bad, inconsistent service > > 55 would not reveal their WHOIS address > > 6 gave us inaccurate data or the email to them was rejected. One > Registrar, Domain Factory, said they were not a Registrar > > > > For Bulk Access (RAA 3.3.6) > > Namescout and Network Solutions refused to offer the service > > eNom, Dotster, and Moniker did not respond to our request for > information and price for bulk download > > > > Registrars are restoring or maintaining domains beyond the 45 day period > of being inaccurate. > > > > 10 Registrars have false WHOIS for their own website domains > > -- > Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org > Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law School > Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University > http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html > http://www.chillingeffects.org/ > https://www.torproject.org/ > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 01:51:08 -0700 > From: "Garth Bruen at KnujOn" <gbruen(a)knujon.com> > To: "Wendy Seltzer" <wendy(a)seltzer.com> > Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at > 11AM in 311/312 > Message-ID: > < > 20100623015108.4ea5342b4f0c5bb9c50429b56f1eb1a7.d5e8286029.wbe(a)email00.secureserver.net > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I welcome you comments via lists etc... > > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at > > 11AM in 311/312 > > From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy(a)seltzer.com> > > Date: Wed, June 23, 2010 4:46 am > > To: gbruen(a)knujon.com > > Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > > > > > Too bad the session conflicts with the ongoing open GNSO Council > > meeting. I'd dispute the relevance of some of these measures to ICANN, > > and would argue that in many cases, no action is warranted. > > > > --Wendy > > > > On 06/23/2010 04:30 AM, gbruen(a)knujon.com wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > > > We are proving this "Cliffs Notes" version of our WHOIS data from our > Registrar audit (http://www.knujon.com/knujon_audit0610.pdf) for today's > WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM in 311/312 > > > > > > For Web-based WHOIS access: > > > 11 Registrars have "look up" service instead of WHOIS > > > 8 have clearly non-working engines or direct the visitor to some > other WHOIS service > > > A Technology Co(Namesystem.com) is manipulating it's own WHOIS > record, returns: "Sorry Domain does not exist", and since we've published > our report they pulled their port 43 offline completely. Note, this was ONLY > for their domain name, all other queries worked. > > > > > > For Port-43 WHOIS Access > > > 30 Registrars have bad, inconsistent service > > > 55 would not reveal their WHOIS address > > > 6 gave us inaccurate data or the email to them was rejected. One > Registrar, Domain Factory, said they were not a Registrar > > > > > > For Bulk Access (RAA 3.3.6) > > > Namescout and Network Solutions refused to offer the service > > > eNom, Dotster, and Moniker did not respond to our request for > information and price for bulk download > > > > > > Registrars are restoring or maintaining domains beyond the 45 day > period of being inaccurate. > > > > > > 10 Registrars have false WHOIS for their own website domains > > > > -- > > Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org > > Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law School > > Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University > > http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html > > http://www.chillingeffects.org/ > > https://www.torproject.org/ > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 06:03:18 -0400 > From: Beau Brendler <beaubrendler(a)earthlink.net> > To: Wendy Seltzer <wendy(a)seltzer.com> > Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at > 11AM in 311/312 > Message-ID: <8F4E5614-37C7-4E40-980D-0931904415CF(a)earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; > delsp=yes > > Wendy...with all due respect, I cannot see how your statement is even > remotely supportable. Port 43 access, to name a single aspect, is part > of the RAA. If I'm missing something here, tell me. > > Please excuse brevity and typos -sent from IPhone > > > On 23/06/2010, at 4:46 AM, Wendy Seltzer <wendy(a)seltzer.com> wrote: > > > Too bad the session conflicts with the ongoing open GNSO Council > > meeting. I'd dispute the relevance of some of these measures to > > ICANN, and would argue that in many cases, no action is warranted. > > > > --Wendy > > > > On 06/23/2010 04:30 AM, gbruen(a)knujon.com wrote: > >> Folks, > >> > >> We are proving this "Cliffs Notes" version of our WHOIS data from > >> our Registrar audit (http://www.knujon.com/knujon_audit0610.pdf) > >> for today's WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM in 311/312 > >> > >> For Web-based WHOIS access: > >> 11 Registrars have "look up" service instead of WHOIS > >> 8 have clearly non-working engines or direct the visitor to > >> some other WHOIS service > >> A Technology Co(Namesystem.com) is manipulating it's own WHOIS > >> record, returns: "Sorry Domain does not exist", and since we've > >> published our report they pulled their port 43 offline completely. > >> Note, this was ONLY for their domain name, all other queries worked. > >> > >> For Port-43 WHOIS Access > >> 30 Registrars have bad, inconsistent service > >> 55 would not reveal their WHOIS address > >> 6 gave us inaccurate data or the email to them was rejected. > >> One Registrar, Domain Factory, said they were not a Registrar > >> > >> For Bulk Access (RAA 3.3.6) > >> Namescout and Network Solutions refused to offer the service > >> eNom, Dotster, and Moniker did not respond to our request for > >> information and price for bulk download > >> > >> Registrars are restoring or maintaining domains beyond the 45 day > >> period of being inaccurate. > >> > >> 10 Registrars have false WHOIS for their own website domains > > > > -- > > Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org > > Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law School > > Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University > > http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html > > http://www.chillingeffects.org/ > > https://www.torproject.org/ > > > > ------ > > NA-Discuss mailing list > > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > > > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > > ------ > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: 23 Jun 2010 10:51:36 -0400 > From: "John R. Levine" <johnl(a)iecc.com> > To: "Beau Brendler" <beaubrendler(a)earthlink.net> > Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at > 11AM in 311/312 > Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1006231048200.90962(a)joyce.lan> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > Wendy...with all due respect, I cannot see how your statement is even > > remotely supportable. Port 43 access, to name a single aspect, is part of > the > > RAA. If I'm missing something here, tell me. > > > > Please excuse brevity and typos -sent from IPhone > > It's ICANN's long standing pro-crime faction, that wants to remove all > accountability for everything. They think they're pro-privacy, but as > anyone who has an inbox full of fake drug spam and phishes knows, they're > mistaken. > > R's, > John > > > >

2 1

Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM in 311/312
by gbruen＠knujon.com June 23, 2010

June 23, 2010

Folks, We are proving this "Cliffs Notes" version of our WHOIS data from our Registrar audit (http://www.knujon.com/knujon_audit0610.pdf) for today's WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM in 311/312 For Web-based WHOIS access: 11 Registrars have "look up" service instead of WHOIS 8 have clearly non-working engines or direct the visitor to some other WHOIS service A Technology Co(Namesystem.com) is manipulating it's own WHOIS record, returns: "Sorry Domain does not exist", and since we've published our report they pulled their port 43 offline completely. Note, this was ONLY for their domain name, all other queries worked. For Port-43 WHOIS Access 30 Registrars have bad, inconsistent service 55 would not reveal their WHOIS address 6 gave us inaccurate data or the email to them was rejected. One Registrar, Domain Factory, said they were not a Registrar For Bulk Access (RAA 3.3.6) Namescout and Network Solutions refused to offer the service eNom, Dotster, and Moniker did not respond to our request for information and price for bulk download Registrars are restoring or maintaining domains beyond the 45 day period of being inaccurate. 10 Registrars have false WHOIS for their own website domains

4 3

Re: [NA-Discuss] Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM in 311/312
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn June 23, 2010

June 23, 2010

I welcome you comments via lists etc... > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Cheat sheet for WHOIS Accuracy Session at > 11AM in 311/312 > From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy(a)seltzer.com> > Date: Wed, June 23, 2010 4:46 am > To: gbruen(a)knujon.com > Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > > Too bad the session conflicts with the ongoing open GNSO Council > meeting. I'd dispute the relevance of some of these measures to ICANN, > and would argue that in many cases, no action is warranted. > > --Wendy > > On 06/23/2010 04:30 AM, gbruen(a)knujon.com wrote: > > Folks, > > > > We are proving this "Cliffs Notes" version of our WHOIS data from our Registrar audit (http://www.knujon.com/knujon_audit0610.pdf) for today's WHOIS Accuracy Session at 11AM in 311/312 > > > > For Web-based WHOIS access: > > 11 Registrars have "look up" service instead of WHOIS > > 8 have clearly non-working engines or direct the visitor to some other WHOIS service > > A Technology Co(Namesystem.com) is manipulating it's own WHOIS record, returns: "Sorry Domain does not exist", and since we've published our report they pulled their port 43 offline completely. Note, this was ONLY for their domain name, all other queries worked. > > > > For Port-43 WHOIS Access > > 30 Registrars have bad, inconsistent service > > 55 would not reveal their WHOIS address > > 6 gave us inaccurate data or the email to them was rejected. One Registrar, Domain Factory, said they were not a Registrar > > > > For Bulk Access (RAA 3.3.6) > > Namescout and Network Solutions refused to offer the service > > eNom, Dotster, and Moniker did not respond to our request for information and price for bulk download > > > > Registrars are restoring or maintaining domains beyond the 45 day period of being inaccurate. > > > > 10 Registrars have false WHOIS for their own website domains > > -- > Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org > Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law School > Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University > http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html > http://www.chillingeffects.org/ > https://www.torproject.org/

1 0

Results of today's Port 43 Test
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn June 22, 2010

June 22, 2010

Hello, Following up on this morning's discussion in the ALAC session on compliance. Below is a list of Port 43 WHOIS failures. Some in the list are recently defunct and I will have to remove them permanently. Others are actually unknown WHOIS locations, because as we discussed in the report the Registrars would not tell us; these are listed as failure. Now, we have no way of knowing for sure, but there is a slight improvement since we released the report. 3 Registrar Port 43's that failed in a test exactly one week ago all passed today. I haven't forgotten about the knujon whois util or address list for everyone, just been busy 21-domain.com FAIL 8hy.hk FAIL abansys.com FAIL agip.com FAIL antagus.de FAIL arcticnames.com FAIL aruba.it FAIL atxdomains.com FAIL austdomains.com FAIL bestbulkregister.com FAIL bhartiairtelservices.in FAIL brights.jp FAIL china.alibaba.com FAIL chinagov.cn FAIL chinaspringboard.com FAIL cronon.org FAIL cyberegistro.com FAIL DesktopDomainer.com FAIL df.eu FAIL digitrad.com FAIL direct.co.kr FAIL dnsexit.com FAIL Domaine.fr FAIL domainjamboree.com FAIL DomainLandrush.com FAIL domainname.at FAIL DomainRegistry.com FAIL domainregistry.de FAIL domains.coop FAIL domainspa.com FAIL domaintechnik.at FAIL drophhub.com FAIL francetelecom.com FAIL geewhizdomains.com FAIL globix.hu FAIL hectamedia.com FAIL hetzner.de FAIL hostnet.com FAIL hostway.com FAIL humeia.com FAIL idgenesis.com FAIL igempresas.com FAIL instra.com FAIL interdomain.es FAIL intermedia.net FAIL intra.com FAIL inwx.de FAIL is.co.za FAIL isimtescil.com FAIL iwelt.de FAIL key-systems.net FAIL komplex.net FAIL LCN.com FAIL livedoor.com FAIL lunarpages.com FAIL mailclub.fr FAIL marcaria.com FAIL MelbourneITDBS.com FAIL metapredict.com FAIL mindgenies.com FAIL namecheap.com FAIL Nameescape.com FAIL namefrog.com FAIL nameshield.net FAIL namesystem.com FAIL net.cn FAIL net4.in FAIL netregistry.com FAIL newgreatdomains.com FAIL portingxs.com FAIL purenic.co.jp FAIL riktad.com FAIL rntd.cn FAIL sedo.com FAIL SimplyNamed.com FAIL smartyhost.com.au FAIL spiritdomains.com FAIL sundancegrp.com FAIL sync.es FAIL tellus.com FAIL twt.it FAIL uk2group.com FAIL united-domains.de FAIL uol.com.br FAIL us.hooyoo.com FAIL verelink.com FAIL websitesource.com FAIL wudomains.com FAIL zzy.cn FAIL

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] ICANN Registrar Audit
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn June 21, 2010

June 21, 2010

"This independent audit of ICANN Registrar adherence and compliance to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement has revealed that162 Registrars may be in breach of their contracts for various reasons. The reasons are not trivial, they range from blocking and manipulating WHOIS access to falsifying applications to knowingly facilitating criminal traffic. This report takes a deep look at the relationships between registration fraud, DNS manipulation, spam, compliance failure and the growing trade in illicit drugs online. We also offer recommendations to correct these problems." > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ICANN Registrar Audit > From: Dharma Dailey <dharma(a)ethoswireless.com> > Date: Mon, June 21, 2010 1:48 pm > To: Garth Bruen at KnujOn <gbruen(a)knujon.com> > Cc: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org, > na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > Garth, > > This is really something. Do you have an executive summary to point > to or circulate? > > > > On Jun 21, 2010, at 1:52 AM, Garth Bruen at KnujOn wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > I would like to invite you to review the results of our comprehensive > > audit of the gTLD Registrars as it relates to non-compliance and > > illicit > > activity: http://www.knujon.com/knujon_audit0610.pdf > > > > Since January KnujOn has been conducing its own review of Registrar > > contractual compliance and our findings are shocking. Among them: > > > > 162 Registrars may be in breach of the RAA, several of them seriously > > so > > > > As stated in our recent release, Who is Blocking WHOIS? > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/who_is_blocking_whois, over 80 > > Registrars > > are blocking, hiding or just providing poor WHOIS access > > > > Several Registrars have bad WHOIS for their own websites > > > > We've caught Registrars flat-out refusing services they're contracted > > to perform > > > > Several Registrars have not posted required customer policies on their > > websites > > > > There are a dozen or so terminated Registrars still selling gTLD and > > claiming ICANN accreditation > > > > As you may be aware, the Registrars have developed tools that help > > trademark infringement. We link these cases to criminal activity as > > well. > > > > And much more. > > > > -Garth > > > > > > ------------------------------------- > > What is the Doomsday Book? http://knujon.com/doomsday > > > > Garth Bruen > > gbruen(a)knujon.com > > http://www.knujon.com > > http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 > > Linkedin Group: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1870205 > > Blog: http://www.circleid.com/members/3296/ > > Twitter: @Knujon > > > > > > > > ------ > > NA-Discuss mailing list > > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > > > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > > ------

1 0

ICANN Registrar Audit
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn June 21, 2010

June 21, 2010

Hello all, I would like to invite you to review the results of our comprehensive audit of the gTLD Registrars as it relates to non-compliance and illicit activity: http://www.knujon.com/knujon_audit0610.pdf Since January KnujOn has been conducing its own review of Registrar contractual compliance and our findings are shocking. Among them: 162 Registrars may be in breach of the RAA, several of them seriously so As stated in our recent release, Who is Blocking WHOIS? http://www.circleid.com/posts/who_is_blocking_whois, over 80 Registrars are blocking, hiding or just providing poor WHOIS access Several Registrars have bad WHOIS for their own websites We've caught Registrars flat-out refusing services they're contracted to perform Several Registrars have not posted required customer policies on their websites There are a dozen or so terminated Registrars still selling gTLD and claiming ICANN accreditation As you may be aware, the Registrars have developed tools that help trademark infringement. We link these cases to criminal activity as well. And much more. -Garth ------------------------------------- What is the Doomsday Book? http://knujon.com/doomsday Garth Bruen gbruen(a)knujon.com http://www.knujon.com http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 Linkedin Group: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1870205 Blog: http://www.circleid.com/members/3296/ Twitter: @Knujon

2 1