ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attacks | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 15 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attac
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Sunday October 28 2001, @07:30PM (#3226)
    User #2810 Info
    A bit of follow-up. Perhaps being pressed for time, I mistakenly typed:
    that users time in their URL line
    which should read:
    that users type in their URL line
    I also neglected to point out another angle. At least as far back as last February Declan McCullagh and USA Today were reporting that Osama bin Laden and other terrorist organizations were using steganograpy, which is a method for hiding files within other files, for example a text file within a picture, perhaps on a porn site. Such a choice would make good sense, even with access to the server logs it would be difficult to decipher which hits on such high trafficked sites might be more meaningful. And just to bring my two recent submissions into some kind of closure, Bruce Shneier, from whom I borrowed the phrase semantic attacks, isn't very optimistic about the ability to stop such traffic. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      kidshtml.com -safe playground
      by Anonymous on Monday October 29 2001, @02:52PM (#3243)
      After reading about porn sites taking expired domains, I thought that this might be of interest.

      kidshtml.com will be launching a very unique service on 11/1/2001.

      Designed to give kids a place to organize on the internet without problems.

      I think it will be huge, and with Holiday gift giving coming close, makes it even more probable.

      A secure place for parents and kids to build sites for their family, dogs, friends, whatever without the problems associated with kids and the internet.

      the url is: http://www.kidshtml.com
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attac
    by Ron_Bennett on Sunday October 28 2001, @08:31PM (#3227)
    User #3011 Info | http://www.wyomissing.com/bennett/
    Relax...the adult industry has been using similar tactics with toll-free phone numbers for years...this is nothing new.

    If companies would pay their bills ONTIME they wouldn't lose their domains and thus wouldn't have such problems...Right?

    And the most important aspect being missed here is the fact that adult oriented companies actually make money using such tactics...NOW WHY IS THAT?? Think about it for a second...if one intends to reach website "company.com" and they somehow are redirected to "nudepixs.com" instead, one would expect they would LEAVE and correct their mistake...right? But it turns out that some people when misdirected for whatever reason, instead of leaving, they will actually whip out their credit card and SPEND MONEY on a website they didn't even intend to reach...and NO ONE FORCED them to do that. Right?

    I think it's high time for people to assume responsibility for their own actions - namely, renewing their domains on time...and lastly, why let expired domains go unused anyways...the adult industry helps maximize economy by recycling domains which helps registrars stay in business and in turn reduces the need to add more TLDs. A win win situation :-)
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Is ICANN going to REDUCE the number of TLDs ?
      by Anonymous on Monday October 29 2001, @03:36AM (#3231)

      Is ICANN going to REDUCE the number of TLDs ?

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attac
      by joppenheimer on Monday October 29 2001, @04:21AM (#3234)
      User #5 Info | http://JudithOppenheimer.com
      Ron's exactly right ... some randomly dialed 800 numbers held by adult companies convert as high as 5% or more to paid customers. (The direct response benchmark for successful *targeted* campaigns, is 2%.)

      Judith
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attac
      by Anonymous on Monday October 29 2001, @05:38AM (#3236)
      Your comment about taking responsibility for actions exposes the fatal flaw in nearly all anti-pornography arguments. Porn exists not because the Internet is irresponsibly architected and dangerous, or because pornographers are technologically wily and clever, but because a massive audience is willing to pay for it. If you want porn to go away, don't buy it. If enough members of the anti-pornography camp followed this advice, demand and thus supply would certainly drop precipitously. (And it's always interesting to me that those who would claim to rail against the exploitation of children are the first to use children as a political football to further their sundry agendas. Children might be the only group in this debate that generally show little interest in porn.)
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attac
      by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Thursday November 01 2001, @04:32PM (#3333)
      User #2810 Info
      Ron_Bennett writes:
      Relax...the adult industry has been using similar tactics with toll-free phone numbers for years
      I fail to see how a toll-free number equates to a screen full of explicit porn, and if the adult industry is using toll-free numbers previously targetted at and intended for children I don't think that is anything to relax about either.
      If companies would pay their bills ONTIME they wouldn't lose their domains and thus wouldn't have such problems...Right?
      Wrong. Did you actually read my submission? Some of these people, and they aren't all companies, lost their names through no fault of their own. Have you never had a problem with a registrar? As some of the proposals for handling expired names would place a higher premium on them than if they were simply renewed, registrars have a built-in financial incentive to allow them to expire.
      if one intends to reach website "company.com" and they somehow are redirected to "nudepixs.com" instead, one would expect they would LEAVE and correct their mistake...right?
      Wrong again, if they're mousetrapped and/or have multiple spawned popups, which is the norm. Did you even read my submission?
      But it turns out that some people when misdirected for whatever reason, instead of leaving, they will actually whip out their credit card and SPEND MONEY on a website they didn't even intend to reach...and NO ONE FORCED them to do that. Right?
      Right, no one forced the children hit with this exploit to whip out their credit card. This is disingenuous at best.
      why let expired domains go unused anyways
      Um, how about because they're someone's intellectual property? I'm not a fan of too much of intellectual property rights being mapped to domain names, but what we're talking about here is not just the name. They've been submitted to search engines, are linked to, bookmarked, added to email address books, et cetera, with a certain intention, they are then hijacked for a different intention. It wouldn't be rocket science to automate a search on about to be expired domains, check their links in, check their search engine rankings, check their hits, and then go for the most popular names, I don't doubt it is being done already. But to then re-register that name based on its popularity rather than its intent, and to use that name to push pornography, at best uncaring whether it is seen by children, at worst targetting them, well, that was not the way the DNS was intended to work.

      I notice that snapnames, which had another of the proposals for handling expired names, has a hot 100 list of expired names. Going to many of them one finds the same technique in play, though they don't list adult domains. Someone going to what was once one site is now another. Snapnames also mentions in their recent newsletter that some people register names for only 4 or 5 days and use them for affiliate clickthru money and then cancel them without penalty. That snapnames or afternic should be in charge of expiring names will just make more of a mess of the DNS.

      ...the adult industry helps maximize economy by recycling domains which helps registrars stay in business and in turn reduces the need to add more TLDs. A win win situation
      Most people don't win by having porn pushed at them through misrepresentation, most people don't win by having fewer TLDs. There are more important things than maximizing profits for registrars or porn merchants. Ron, I often appreciate your posts here and elsewhere, but this is just so wrongheaded I can't believe it.

      BTW, Bruce Schneier, from whom I took the term semantic attacks, and whose name I mis-spelled, will be a featured speaker at MdR. -g

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attac
      by Anonymous on Sunday November 11 2001, @12:46AM (#3601)
      If companies would pay their bills ONTIME they wouldn't lose their domains and thus wouldn't have such problems...Right?

      Sounds like you've never dealt with Network Solutions. I tried to transfer my domain away from near the end of its registration period. They sat on my request until after it had expired, then told me I couldn't transfer it because it was expired!

      So, I should have paid them for 2 more years in order to move my domain? Fsck that; in my opinion NetSol is just as low as the porno site operator who registered my domain before I could re-register with a new registrar.

      I don't have anything against porn; I just don't think people need to be tricked into finding it.

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    I'm not too concerned about this -- and here's why
    by Anonymous on Sunday October 28 2001, @09:06PM (#3228)
    First of all -- I don't have any kids. Why is it the public's responsibility to protect other people's children from porn? Why does ICANN, or the Government have to do something to stop this?

    I say it is the parent's responsibility to monitor this stuff. If you are a parent and you don't want your kids to be exposed to this stuff you have a couple of choices:

    1) Buy filtering software and use it! There are many pieces of software that can filter URLS, eliminate pop-up ads, and ad banners, and offer your kids a "safe" surfing experience.

    2) Sit with your young kids and monitor their travels on the Internet. If you give the kid a phone line and a computer in their room and don't pay attention to their surfing habits-- you (as a parent)are to blame not the porn sites.

    3) If you are a religious fanatic and don't want your kids exposed to ANYTHING -- take away their computer. It is a safe bet that the Amish don't have problems like this in their house.

    I have yet to see evidence that pornography in general is "harmful" to anyone. When I was a young kid I stumbled on my dad's Playboys -- and enjoyed every minute of it.

    As far as I know -- porn has been around for a LONG, LONG time (way before the camera was even invented) and yet somehow, society is still here. Go figure.


    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      The Amish are very large Cell-Phone users
      by Anonymous on Monday October 29 2001, @03:40AM (#3232)

      The Amish are very large Cell-Phone users

      There is a good article on the net about how
      they selectively decided that cell-phones are
      tools to communicate, apparently sent by God.

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Look Who's Talking
        by Anonymous on Monday October 29 2001, @03:43AM (#3233)
        http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.01/amish_pr.html
        Look Who's Talking

        The Amish are famous for shunning technology. But their secret love affair with the cell phone is causing an uproar.

        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: I'm not too concerned about this -- and here's
      by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Monday October 29 2001, @04:47AM (#3235)
      User #2810 Info
      Anon writes:
      Why is it the public's responsibility to protect other people's children from porn?
      Why is it the public's responsibility to provide schooling, crossing guards, crosswalks, stop signs, or for that matter to protect children from predators? Is that all a waste of your tax dollars?
      I say it is the parent's responsibility to monitor this stuff.
      I couldn't agree more that parents need to be involved. My own then pre-teen children were writing code and hacking back when there were almost no other children to be found online. They still needed to be monitored and made cyberstreetwise as there were already pedophiles online who pretended to be children. But leaving it entirely up to parents just doesn't work, we're dealing with non-tech savvy parents monitoring non-tech savvy children to protect them from tech-savvy predators.
      Buy filtering software and use it! There are many pieces of software that can filter URLS, eliminate pop-up ads, and ad banners
      And there is counter-software to defeat that. I don't care for filtering software, for a number of reasons, here's a few. And as my submission dealt in part with porn sites buying up and using previously childfriendly URLs (did you even read it?) filtering based on URLs isn't just exceedingly dumb, it is now actually counter-productive, perhaps that is one reason such names are being bought.
      If you are a religious fanatic and don't want your kids exposed to ANYTHING -- take away their computer. It is a safe bet that the Amish don't have problems like this in their house.
      Actually you'd lose that bet, there are Amish online. Perhaps the Taliban would be a better example, perhaps not. FWIW, my opposition to this use of expired names has nothing to do with religion.
      I have yet to see evidence that pornography in general is "harmful" to anyone. When I was a young kid I stumbled on my dad's Playboys
      There is considerable research about the effects of pornography on children, much of it negative, much of it available online. Playboy style porn is far from the worst, though I don't think Playboy should market to children either, any more than the tobacco companies. But I guess that should be left to the parents too, every image on TV, movies, video games, comic books, billboards, is the sole responsibility of the parent to monitor? Guess your father's monitoring left a bit to be desired.

      There are certain images that transcend my ability to properly process them, a horror is left etched on my mind. Examples include the Nazi death camps, the Zapruder freeze frames, the WTC on September 11. Another is a porn site, apparently from an orphanage in what used to be the Soviet Union, of emaciated children, many of them pre-teen, engaged in posed, though real and explicit, sexual acts. If this can sear the mind of an adult one cannot imagine what it might do to a child. Sorry, the internet is not your father's Playboy. -g

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attac
    by Anonymous on Monday October 29 2001, @02:48AM (#3230)

    You need to ask the Business Constituency.
    They represent the XXX (adult content) industry.

    Commercial and Business Entities:

    AsiaPac (.nz) - Grant Forsyth grant.forsyth@clear.co.nz
    Europe (.uk) - Philip Sheppard philip.sheppard@aim.be
    NorthA (.us) - Marilyn Cade mcade@att.com


    Many people use root servers that are located
    on their internal corporate internet. According
    to the BC, they want that stopped. Those servers
    could give people different results in different
    companies. For example, an .XXX TLD may cause
    people to be redirected to an internal site, as
    opposed to the XXX sites run by the BC.

    Over 50% of the traffic on the Internet is
    related to the Adult Content industry. That
    is essentially the same as the BC. The BC
    wants to make sure that when you click on
    some body part, on one of their sites, that
    you get the result they want you to see.
    They want a consistent response for the
    Adult Content they package.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attac
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Thursday November 01 2001, @08:20PM (#3346)
    User #2810 Info
    At least one more expiring domain becomes a porn site, and as the prior owner let numerous desirable names expire, it might not be the only one. Quite an interesting article on that and other namespace sillyness here. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: The XXX-piring Namespace - More Semantic Attac
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Friday November 02 2001, @06:07AM (#3356)
    User #2810 Info
    An article and user comments on this from Afternic. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com