Comments on: ICANN Puts eNom and Moniker “On Notice” http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/ News and Views for the Domain Name Industry Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:34:27 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Knujon http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/comment-page-1/#comment-177705 Knujon Wed, 28 May 2008 00:50:05 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/#comment-177705 JJ - I suppose that would be the case if Knujon were anything like spews, but it isn't. Yes we are aware that headers are spoofed, but we are not talking about the source of the email, we're talking about transaction sites. Sites selling knockoff goods, etc. When you "hunt me down" will it be with a pitchfork and a torch? Andrew - typo-squatting was not part of this study, but we do have something on that coming out shortly and since you asked, I will post it here first when it is ready. JJ – I suppose that would be the case if Knujon were anything like spews, but it isn’t. Yes we are aware that headers are spoofed, but we are not talking about the source of the email, we’re talking about transaction sites. Sites selling knockoff goods, etc. When you “hunt me down” will it be with a pitchfork and a torch?

Andrew – typo-squatting was not part of this study, but we do have something on that coming out shortly and since you asked, I will post it here first when it is ready.

]]> By: JJ http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/comment-page-1/#comment-177666 JJ Tue, 27 May 2008 23:00:07 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/#comment-177666 This report reminds me of spews. Like them ICANN is out of touch with whats really going on. Did you happen to consider that spammers "spoof" domains and even IP addresses to send their spam? This has been going on for years. Get with the program already. If ICANN does like SPEWS did and starts pressuring registrars to suspend domains due to spam emails which were very likely spoofed emails and any of mine get suspended you can take notice of the fact that I will do you just like I did them and hunt you down. SPEWS owners had to crawl under a rock they had so many angry web hosts and domain owners after them. But I have a feeling you're already there. This report reminds me of spews. Like them ICANN is out of touch with whats really going on. Did you happen to consider that spammers “spoof” domains and even IP addresses to send their spam? This has been going on for years. Get with the program already. If ICANN does like SPEWS did and starts pressuring registrars to suspend domains due to spam emails which were very likely spoofed emails and any of mine get suspended you can take notice of the fact that I will do you just like I did them and hunt you down. SPEWS owners had to crawl under a rock they had so many angry web hosts and domain owners after them. But I have a feeling you’re already there.

]]> By: bob bruen http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/comment-page-1/#comment-177599 bob bruen Tue, 27 May 2008 18:17:59 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/#comment-177599 It appears that I am one of thse idiot vigilantes. KnujOn recives email from users all across the globe. They many use filters of their own choosing. We check for accuracy, then file complaints, which are evaluted again (twice). We check sites like spamhause registrarStats, bl[ao]cklists, independent researchers, conference presentations,etc. This is not a loose cannon operation. We hve a terrabyte data that we draw from, plus years of work by others on the problm. It is just that the time has come to put a stop to the crap. It appears that I am one of thse idiot vigilantes. KnujOn recives email from users all across the globe. They many use filters of their own choosing. We check for accuracy, then file complaints, which are evaluted again (twice). We check sites like spamhause registrarStats, bl[ao]cklists, independent researchers, conference presentations,etc. This is not a loose cannon operation. We hve a terrabyte data that we draw from, plus years of work by others on the problm. It is just that the time has come to put a stop to the crap.

]]> By: Andrew http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/comment-page-1/#comment-177598 Andrew Tue, 27 May 2008 18:17:03 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/#comment-177598 @ Knujon - thanks for the added information. How do trademark typos play into your rankings? For example, if a registrar has a lot of customers registering typos of trademarks, would that affect your trademark score? @ Knujon – thanks for the added information. How do trademark typos play into your rankings? For example, if a registrar has a lot of customers registering typos of trademarks, would that affect your trademark score?

]]> By: Knujon http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/comment-page-1/#comment-177589 Knujon Tue, 27 May 2008 16:31:51 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/#comment-177589 What was meant was that the top ten is not totally populated by huge registrars, yes enom and moniker are big, but smaller registrars with higher concentrations of illicit sites are actually more prominent. Not inaccurate, just not fully explained in a mini-blurb. There's obviously several categories of product-related spam. Spam and Sites advertizing non-specific "male enhancers" or "weight loss" pills are distinct from spam that relates to particular brand names of pharmaceuticals. The trademark rating takes this into consideration: does this spam-site feature vague products or specific knockoffs? The specific knockoff or counterfeit is more serious because it harms not only the consumer but also the manufacturer, the market and public trust. It would tip the scales if there was one domain with a million spams, but this is not the case they are much more evenly distributed. The point being, given the extent of the abuse, how could the registrar not know? The record inaccuracies are measured by our software. <> Ah, I am selling counterfeit goods all around the world and infecting networks with malware? Assisting policy enforcement and conducting research is no vigilantism. <> We have nothing to do with black lists or filtering. So if your emails bounce it has nothing to do with KnujOn. However, I will wear your "idiot vigilante" tag with pride. What was meant was that the top ten is not totally populated by huge registrars, yes enom and moniker are big, but smaller registrars with higher concentrations of illicit sites are actually more prominent. Not inaccurate, just not fully explained in a mini-blurb.

There’s obviously several categories of product-related spam. Spam and Sites advertizing non-specific “male enhancers” or “weight loss” pills are distinct from spam that relates to particular brand names of pharmaceuticals. The trademark rating takes this into consideration: does this spam-site feature vague products or specific knockoffs? The specific knockoff or counterfeit is more serious because it harms not only the consumer but also the manufacturer, the market and public trust.

It would tip the scales if there was one domain with a million spams, but this is not the case they are much more evenly distributed. The point being, given the extent of the abuse, how could the registrar not know? The record inaccuracies are measured by our software.

<>

Ah, I am selling counterfeit goods all around the world and infecting networks with malware? Assisting policy enforcement and conducting research is no vigilantism.

<>

We have nothing to do with black lists or filtering. So if your emails bounce it has nothing to do with KnujOn. However, I will wear your “idiot vigilante” tag with pride.

]]> By: c'mon domains http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/comment-page-1/#comment-177566 c'mon domains Tue, 27 May 2008 15:16:48 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/#comment-177566 Knujon is just another internet vigilante that is just as bad as the spammers themselves. Your emails getting filtered without a bounce or any explanation? Blame characters like the one of above. They cause just as much disruptions to email and the internet as the spammers themselves. I agree there needs to be a solution to spamming but these idiot vigilantes are absolutely not the answer. Knujon is just another internet vigilante that is just as bad as the spammers themselves. Your emails getting filtered without a bounce or any explanation?

Blame characters like the one of above. They cause just as much disruptions to email and the internet as the spammers themselves. I agree there needs to be a solution to spamming but these idiot vigilantes are absolutely not the answer.

]]> By: Andrew http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/comment-page-1/#comment-177561 Andrew Tue, 27 May 2008 14:50:55 +0000 http://domainnamewire.com/2008/05/27/icann-puts-enom-and-moniker-on-notice/#comment-177561 @Knujon - So if Moniker had, say, one domain registered at it that had one million spam messages sent about it, that could tip the scales even though it's just one domain? Also, can you explain how the trademark numbers and invalid whois numbers were determined? Thanks @Knujon – So if Moniker had, say, one domain registered at it that had one million spam messages sent about it, that could tip the scales even though it’s just one domain?

Also, can you explain how the trademark numbers and invalid whois numbers were determined?

Thanks

]]>