VeriSign sues ICANN to restore Site Finder

TalkBack 9 of 21:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Likely alternatives?

"who has shown any harm from the convenience of not getting an ERROR 404 when you mistype a site, and, instead, are offered some likely alternatives)???"

Likely alternatives? What sopts verislime from showing only sponsored alternatives? What's to prevent a company, say Microsoftware, who will surely be prevented from using www.microsoftware.com, from buying their way to the top listing for microsoftware.com? Microsoft can't really sue the company for trademark infringement since the domain is bogus, but Microsoftware will benefit from said domain and the familiarity of the name to Microsoft (not that I use either, it's just an example).

What's to stop verislime from redirecting someone who mistypes a registrar to one of verislime's own subsidaries? Why should verislime benefit from your mistake?

What's to stop me from sending spam and using a known bogus web site, knowing full well that you will visit that page to file your complaint? You get to visit verislime instead of discovering the domain is bogus. The mere existence of the domain in a DNS record will make many anti-spam tools falsely assume the message is legit and will pass it on to you. You, meanwhile, are blaming the spam tool or the spammer, when the real problem sources to verislime.

Many netizens don't fully realize the impact that site finder could cause if it is re-implemented. Many netizens don't see the harm. To them, and honestly so, there is no harm. They type in www.acemanvils.com and verislime tells them they typed in a non-existent domain. Further, they offer some excellent (in their opinion) alternatives, which may include Acme Anvils but doesn't have to. And since verislime it supposed to be trusted, the common netizen may not realize that the offered alternatives are all sponsored advertisers and may not necessarily be the best alternatives.

The real harm is in the underlying technologies that drive the Internet and help administrators run it as efficiently as possible. Many anti-spam tools, especially those that report bogus domains, would cease to function properly because verislime would, by providing a working DNS entry, declare that all domains are valid. Companies that want a competitor's business will pay verislime for top listings on URLs that are close enough to be considered trademark infringements, and because the domain isn't registered there is no such infringement.

In order to get tools to function again, they would have to be modified or rewritten to detect the redirects that verislime is using. To allow companies to protect their name, they would have to purchase all misspelled domains, a cost they currently don't have, which will drive up prices.

Why should the programming and spam-fighting world change the way they do business simply because verislime wants to discreetly and, IMO, unethically generate ad revenue by sending lost surfers to a site they recommend (how many recommendations will not be purchased)?

Why should companies have to spend money on domains they don't need or can't use just because verislime is in the business of aiding the theft of said company's customers?

Yes, getting an informative page that tells the surfer that what they've typed in doesn't exist, but since when has the default performance of Internet Explorer done anything different? And IE could be configured to bring up search results from whichever search engine the surfer desires; verislime has decided that that choice doesn't belong with the surfer, but with verislime.

Personally, if verislime does put site finder back up, I will register my vote against it by blocking access between my network and verislime. My subscribers will see a real 404 page, and they're smart enough to check their spelling at that point. I will register my domain outside the U.S. and ensure I give verislime as little money as possible. I will make my opinion very known on newsgroups and encourage other admins to take similar steps to ensure verislime has no presence on their networks.

Posted by: Larry the Security Guy   Posted on: 02/27/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Reducing Server Total Cost of Ownership with VMware Virtualization Software VMware VMware virtualization enables customers to reduce their server TCO and ... Download Now