Douglas Otis wrote:
On Aug 13, 2007, at 2:01 PM, Carl Karsten wrote:
I am not sure tasting is criminal or fraud.
Tracking domain related crime is hindered by the millions of domains
registered daily for "domain tasting." Unregistered domains likely to
attract errant lookups will not vary greatly from unregistered domains
useful for phishing. The large flux in domain names significantly
inhibits anti-phishing efforts.
doesn't make it criminal or fraud, unless you can prove the intent was to hinder
law enforcement. good luck with that.
Although some may see delays in publishing as problematic, often domain
facilitated crime depends upon the milli-second publishing rapidity used
to evade protective strategies. A publishing process that offers
notification will allow protection services a means to stay ahead of
criminals. Exceptions could be granted on an exigent or emergency
basis, where of course additional fees might be required.
"exigent or emergency" sounds like someone would have to approve/deny the
request. One of 2 things will have to happen:
1) spikes in number of requests per day will overwhelm the staff, and
"emergency" requests will go unanswered for days.
2) a huge staff will have to be paid to be standing by and normally not doing
anything, just to cover the spikes. and the chance of only having just enough
to cover the spikes is slim to none, so either #1 will happen anyway, (just not
as often) or the staff will be extra huge such that it is always underulitized,
even during the highest spikes.
Just as background checks are normally part of the hand gun trade, a
background check should be normally part of the domain trade.
see my other post (doesn't scale)
Many are
deceived by "cousin" domains frequently used in crimes netting billions
in losses. Money garnered by capturing errant domain entries can not
justify criminal losses that are likely to have been otherwise
prevented. Domain tasting is worse than a disgrace.
you lost me on this one.
This is sounding like "People Vs Larry Flint" where he says "you don't have to
like my magazine, but you do have to let me publish it." I am not saying
tasting is a free speech thing, but I do see it as something currently legal,
and don't see a way to make it a crime without adversely effecting the rest of
the system.
For domains to play any role in securing email, a published MX record
should become a necessary acceptance requirement. Using MX records also
consolidates policy locales which mitigates some DDoS concerns.
I think it is too late to try to reform e-mail. but I am curious how you think
this would be implemented in the existing system.
Carl K