<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fabulous&#8217; Executive Lock Would Have Saved CheckFree.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/11/fabulous-executive-lock-would-have-saved-checkfreecom/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/11/fabulous-executive-lock-would-have-saved-checkfreecom/</link>
	<description>News and Views for the Domain Name Industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:17:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Doug</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/11/fabulous-executive-lock-would-have-saved-checkfreecom/comment-page-1/#comment-297719</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 20:46:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3587#comment-297719</guid>
		<description>Installing stronger authentication to preclude redirection is akin to putting a padlock on a house door when all the windows and remaining doors are missing.  Sure, the stronger authentication would prevent this specific attack, but there are so many ways to cause a redirection that stronger authentication along would do nothing to stop the attacks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Installing stronger authentication to preclude redirection is akin to putting a padlock on a house door when all the windows and remaining doors are missing.  Sure, the stronger authentication would prevent this specific attack, but there are so many ways to cause a redirection that stronger authentication along would do nothing to stop the attacks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karan Goyal</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/11/fabulous-executive-lock-would-have-saved-checkfreecom/comment-page-1/#comment-296601</link>
		<dc:creator>Karan Goyal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:57:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3587#comment-296601</guid>
		<description>Tucows/OpenSRS provides the free domain lock feature which locks domain transfers and nameserver change.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tucows/OpenSRS provides the free domain lock feature which locks domain transfers and nameserver change.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: monte</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/11/fabulous-executive-lock-would-have-saved-checkfreecom/comment-page-1/#comment-296580</link>
		<dc:creator>monte</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:57:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3587#comment-296580</guid>
		<description>The portfolio MaxLock does protect against DNS, Url Forwarding, Email Forwarding, email, admin, transfer, pushes, etc.  It was just released and is available yesterday.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The portfolio MaxLock does protect against DNS, Url Forwarding, Email Forwarding, email, admin, transfer, pushes, etc.  It was just released and is available yesterday.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reece</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/11/fabulous-executive-lock-would-have-saved-checkfreecom/comment-page-1/#comment-296126</link>
		<dc:creator>Reece</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 04:54:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3587#comment-296126</guid>
		<description>Looks like it must be a recent change with MaxLock -- I don&#039;t recall them offering the additional nameserver protection when I last looked a couple weeks ago. Good to know though :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looks like it must be a recent change with MaxLock &#8212; I don&#8217;t recall them offering the additional nameserver protection when I last looked a couple weeks ago. Good to know though <img src='http://domainnamewire.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/11/fabulous-executive-lock-would-have-saved-checkfreecom/comment-page-1/#comment-296086</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 03:03:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3587#comment-296086</guid>
		<description>Thanks.  Their previously announced MaxLock product didn&#039;t handle nameserver changes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks.  Their previously announced MaxLock product didn&#8217;t handle nameserver changes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sipbkk</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/11/fabulous-executive-lock-would-have-saved-checkfreecom/comment-page-1/#comment-296080</link>
		<dc:creator>sipbkk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 02:53:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3587#comment-296080</guid>
		<description>Moniker offers Portfolio MaxLock - Same kind of deal.

http://www.moniker.com/services/services.jsp#portfolioMaxLock</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Moniker offers Portfolio MaxLock &#8211; Same kind of deal.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.moniker.com/services/services.jsp#portfolioMaxLock" rel="nofollow">http://www.moniker.com/services/services.jsp#portfolioMaxLock</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
