Verisign "owns" the internet...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Verisign "owns" the internet...
Internet users need to know that...
Verisign, the company which has the contract to run the .com domain (but does not actually own it, despite what it thinks) yesterday made changes to the .com nameservers which effectively make every .com domain valid, by dint of making all the genuinely non-existant domains point to one of Verisign's advertising servers
This will have serious side-effects. For example, anti-spam software, which checks to see that mail comes from a vaild adress, will now think that every .com email is valid, thus requiring much more effort to distinguish.
Indeed, if you mistype an email address, your private email will end up going to Verisign's server. Right now, that server is rejecting all incoming email, but do you trust them not to do something else in the future -- notwithstanding their "Privacy Policy".
Further, you are deemed to have agreed to their "Conditions of Use", despite the fact that you had no intention of going there. In particular, the CofU contains:-
But you cannot "DISCONTINUE USE OF THE VERISIGN SERVICES OR OUR SITE", since they have hijacked your request and forced you there in the first place 
Also, you have agreed to indemnify Verising against any "misuse" you may make of the information they've supplied to you
All of which constitutes a diabolical abuse of their monopoly position, IMNSHO
Verisign, the company which has the contract to run the .com domain (but does not actually own it, despite what it thinks) yesterday made changes to the .com nameservers which effectively make every .com domain valid, by dint of making all the genuinely non-existant domains point to one of Verisign's advertising servers
This will have serious side-effects. For example, anti-spam software, which checks to see that mail comes from a vaild adress, will now think that every .com email is valid, thus requiring much more effort to distinguish.
Indeed, if you mistype an email address, your private email will end up going to Verisign's server. Right now, that server is rejecting all incoming email, but do you trust them not to do something else in the future -- notwithstanding their "Privacy Policy".
Further, you are deemed to have agreed to their "Conditions of Use", despite the fact that you had no intention of going there. In particular, the CofU contains:-
10. Sole Remedy.
YOUR USE OF THE VERISIGN SERVICES IS AT YOUR OWN RISK. IF YOU ARE DISSATISFIED WITH ANY OF THE MATERIALS, RESULTS OR OTHER CONTENTS OF THE VERISIGN SERVICES OR WITH THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, OUR PRIVACY STATEMENT, OR OTHER POLICIES, YOUR SOLE REMEDY IS TO DISCONTINUE USE OF THE VERISIGN SERVICES OR OUR SITE.
YOUR USE OF THE VERISIGN SERVICES IS AT YOUR OWN RISK. IF YOU ARE DISSATISFIED WITH ANY OF THE MATERIALS, RESULTS OR OTHER CONTENTS OF THE VERISIGN SERVICES OR WITH THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, OUR PRIVACY STATEMENT, OR OTHER POLICIES, YOUR SOLE REMEDY IS TO DISCONTINUE USE OF THE VERISIGN SERVICES OR OUR SITE.
Also, you have agreed to indemnify Verising against any "misuse" you may make of the information they've supplied to you
All of which constitutes a diabolical abuse of their monopoly position, IMNSHO
'nough said
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Raynes Park
Age: 58
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been meaning to post a reply for a while but a usual not enough hours in the day.
If this article by the BBC is correct then steps are being taken to rap verisign's nuckles, though they deserve a good kicking in the nuts IMHO.
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to have a go at taking over the Internet, even in part. It's a weird set up, probably unique in the world, in that it is owned by everyone at the same time as being owned by no-one, if you get my drift (or at least that how I explain it myself, maybe I should give off the anti-freeze for a while
). It would be an entrepreneur's dream come true to be able to 'own' it.
But, yeah, I wholly agree with you RTFM, how dare they basically!
I particularly detest the fact that you would be forced to buy the .com equivalent of any other domain extension type site you may have much to the profit of Verisign and associated speculators & domain squatters. (this I notice does not affect pprune as someone (Danny?) obviously had the foresight of purchasing pprune.com at some stage).
Rant over,
amofw
If this article by the BBC is correct then steps are being taken to rap verisign's nuckles, though they deserve a good kicking in the nuts IMHO.
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to have a go at taking over the Internet, even in part. It's a weird set up, probably unique in the world, in that it is owned by everyone at the same time as being owned by no-one, if you get my drift (or at least that how I explain it myself, maybe I should give off the anti-freeze for a while
). It would be an entrepreneur's dream come true to be able to 'own' it.But, yeah, I wholly agree with you RTFM, how dare they basically!
I particularly detest the fact that you would be forced to buy the .com equivalent of any other domain extension type site you may have much to the profit of Verisign and associated speculators & domain squatters. (this I notice does not affect pprune as someone (Danny?) obviously had the foresight of purchasing pprune.com at some stage).
Rant over,
amofw
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VeriSign's Site Finder is undead...
Apparently, Verisign have manged to find a bunch of people who thing that what they did was a good idea, but won't release any details of this "customer survey" as it's "commercially confidential" (yeah, right.) Consequently, they plan to resurrect their sitefinder service
See, amognst others,
The Register
http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-5092133.html
Slashdot
Apparently, Verisign have manged to find a bunch of people who thing that what they did was a good idea, but won't release any details of this "customer survey" as it's "commercially confidential" (yeah, right.) Consequently, they plan to resurrect their sitefinder service
See, amognst others,
The Register
http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-5092133.html
Slashdot
