[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois

Mon Feb 20 19:42:53 UTC 2017

Lets shoot for Johannesburg.

Theo

On 20-2-2017 17:52, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
>
> Maybe punt until we’re somewhere a bit more affordable?
>
> Copenhagen is going to be pricey J
>
> --
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
>
> Blacknight Solutions
>
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
>
> https://www.blacknight.com/
>
> http://blacknight.blog/
>
> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
>
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>
> Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
>
> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business 
> Park,Sleaty
>
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
>
> *From: *<gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of John Horton 
> <john.horton at legitscript.com>
> *Date: *Monday 20 February 2017 at 16:43
> *To: *Chris Pelling <chris at netearth.net>
> *Cc: *gnso-rds-pdp-wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois
>
> That /was/ a good event (the Dublin public safety/registrars event).
>
>
> John Horton
> President and CEO, LegitScript
>
> *Follow****Legit**Script*: LinkedIn 
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com>  | Facebook 
> <https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript> | Twitter 
> <https://twitter.com/legitscript> | _Blog 
> <http://blog.legitscript.com>_  |Google+ 
> <https://plus.google.com/112436813474708014933/posts>
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 8:29 AM, Chris Pelling <chris at netearth.net 
> <mailto:chris at netearth.net>> wrote:
>
>     HI Sam,
>
>     Well, we have ICANN 58 coming up with a very tight schedule
>     looking at the draft.  Something the registrars took on was at the
>     Dublin meeting, we booked a room above a pub, got some drinks and
>     munchies together, to get the "LEA/Public safety" and registrars
>     together - the night was a success.
>
>     IF we could find somewhere, and get something sorted, would there
>     be any interest from the group, and if so, how many ?
>
>     I appreciate this is a totally different situation and
>     requirement, but, its just a thought :)
>
>     Kind regards,
>
>     Chris
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     *From: *"Sam Lanfranco" <sam at lanfranco.net <mailto:sam at lanfranco.net>>
>     *To: *"chris" <chris at netearth.net <mailto:chris at netearth.net>>,
>     "Michele Neylon" <michele at blacknight.com
>     <mailto:michele at blacknight.com>>
>     *Cc: *"gnso-rds-pdp-wg" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>     <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>>
>     *Sent: *Monday, 20 February, 2017 14:38:40
>     *Subject: *Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Dangers of public whois
>
>     Chris,
>
>     Your comment yanked my chain. I agree with you 100% when you say
>     “The problem is from the takedown / infringement requests we see,
>     1, 2 and 3 [*/due diligence/*] are not even thought of, *so part
>     of this is education*.” Good idea. How do we get there from here?
>
>     As an economist I get pulled into very large project proposals
>     that are being clobbered together by well meaning, well educated,
>     people with their own personal PICs (Public Interest Commitments)
>     and who just want to do good. In the “good works” area there are
>     just as many crooks, frauds, and sociopaths as can be found
>     trolling in the DNS system. However, over and over again it takes
>     me less than two hours of due diligence to uncover yet one more
>     “financier” who is a fraud, a crook, or simply trolling for a big 
>     hit, and has the financial resources of a raccoon, information the
>     “good works” people have managed to overlook.
>
>     An effective educational strategy is clearly needed here. That may
>     include a */DumbOne’s Guide to DNS Complaints/* (avoided a
>     trademark there) and maybe even generic semi-standard forms for
>     initiating complaints. To do that, it would be useful to know the
>     data on types of complaints by type of complainant (e.g. how many
>     and what types come from lawyers, from individuals, etc.) as
>     background for better education here.  Access to that "How to"
>     guide should at least be flagged in the domain name registration
>     process, the web hosting process and in queries about complaining.
>
>     Sam L.
>
>     On 2/20/2017 8:32 AM, Chris Pelling wrote:
>
>         I'll weigh in here for a registrar who does not host content
>         that is not owned by him.
>
>         My views and points on this are, for content based issues, in
>         priority order, top being the highest (and first port of call) :
>
>         1. Registrant if available or any contact that is identifiable
>         on the website in question, if a sub-domain, check the main
>         domain by removing the subdomain and adding www or leaving it
>         off.    (some free hosting sites give subdomains away free,
>         but the main site is always only 1 click away)
>
>         2. Hosting company, look at the nameservers and this sometimes
>         gives the hosting company name, put the nameserver name into
>         google and more often than not, the hosting company will pop
>         up - contact them alerting them to the fact that there is
>         potentially infringing information on a website that is hosted
>         on servers under their control.  Good hosting companies are
>         very responsive.
>
>         3. If you cannot work out 2 above, whois the IP address of the
>         website (including any subdomain), this will give you the IP
>         address owner, they will surely know whom that have given /
>         rented / leased the IPs too and this gives you 2 above.  If
>         you from doing this get the registrar and they are not the
>         hosting company, this would lend to it be a forwarding service,
>
>         4. If they are a "reseller centric/wholesale"  registrar
>         (eNom, Tucows. Realtime, NEO), then WHOIS will often have a
>         "Registration service provided by" or "Reseller" in the whois
>         output, this gives you the registering party who took the
>         order, if not at the very least the registrar.
>
>         The problem is from the takedown / infringement requests we
>         see, 1, 2 and 3 are not even thought of, so part of this is
>         education.
>
>         Kind regards,
>
>         Chris
>
>         ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>       < rest deleted >
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>     gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170220/4b519de9/attachment-0001.html>