Rogers Hijacks DNS, Puts Yahoo! Ads on Google's Subdomains

dgridley · 07-20-2008, 01:26 PM

Rogers, a huge cable internet provider in Canada, has decided to hijack all unregistered domains, and replace them with Yahoo! advertisements. This means Rogers users who type in a domain that doesn't exist, are now getting Yahoo ads instead of the normal "not found" error.

http://blamcast.net/articles/rogers-hijacks-dns

Wow.. Google's not gonna like that.

gjvblack · 07-20-2008, 01:52 PM

Looks like Google AND Yahoo are going to be pissed. This would bring in hundreds of dollars in revenue though for all those ads. Wonder what will happen when Google finds out, im pretty sure Google can take them down...

Chicken · 07-20-2008, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by gjvblack

Looks like Google AND Yahoo are going to be pissed. This would bring in hundreds of dollars in revenue though for all those ads. Wonder what will happen when Google finds out, im pretty sure Google can take them down...

It would bring a lot more the hundreds of dollars of ads in. Rogers is a pretty big company and I don't think they would back down to Google.

dgridley · 07-20-2008, 02:19 PM

I agree.. Rogers is pretty darn big.. and let's face it, no ISP's = no internetz. I think Rogers can give Google a run for the money.

To be fair, I think there's not alot wrong with it.. they're in business to make money, after all.

Originally Posted by Chicken

It would bring a lot more the hundreds of dollars of ads in. Rogers is a pretty big company and I don't think they would back down to Google.

gjvblack · 07-20-2008, 02:25 PM

True, but can google still ban their sites? or sue them for this?

dgridley · 07-20-2008, 02:27 PM

You can sue someone for anything.. be interesting to see how this plays out. Roger's legal team must have looked into the legality before hand, I'd think.

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...rs+hijacks+dns

Steven · 07-20-2008, 04:25 PM

I was wondering what that site was about...
I'm using Rogers, and I get this annoying page when I type in the wrong domain.

http://www20.search.rogers.com/searc...ammeplease.com

**matt_bodis** · 07-20-2008, 05:30 PM

They didn't hijack DNS.

This is a deal that most ISPs have with either Yahoo or Google. Verizon DSL has the same deal with Yahoo:

http://wwwz.websearch.verizon.net/se...mDonnl39uLnSH5

dgridley · 07-20-2008, 05:56 PM

I wonder how Google feels getting Yahoo ads on their 404 pages?

Originally Posted by cfguru360

They didn't hijack DNS.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/industry-news/494883-rogers-hijacks-dns-puts-yahoo-ads.html

This is a deal that most ISPs have with either Yahoo or Google. Verizon DSL has the same deal with Yahoo:

http://wwwz.websearch.verizon.net/se...mDonnl39uLnSH5

**matt_bodis** · 07-20-2008, 06:37 PM

Well Verizon only shows the ads on non-registered domain names, so the Rogers setup is a bit different.

You can just imagine how much cash they are bringing in from these types of deals.

Jackie · 07-20-2008, 06:51 PM

Use an alternative DNS provider like http://opendns.com/ if you don't like it. It's free.

ISPs, ideally, should give subscribers the choice to opt-out though.

Ronald Regging · 07-20-2008, 08:19 PM

If they were just serving up ads on non-existent domains, that would be one thing. However, by including non-existent subdomains on established domains, I think they'll find themselves getting sued sooner than later and probably by more than one company.

I'm not sure how they could argue that they aren't directly profiting off of Google's TM. The people who are trying to go to those non-existent subdomains are obviously attempting to access Google's site, be it unsuccessfully. I would imagine in most cases, these attempts are due to typos of an existing subdomain.

Ctack · 07-21-2008, 12:25 AM

Originally Posted by Ronald Regging

If they were just serving up ads on non-existent domains, that would be one thing. However, by including non-existent subdomains on established domains, I think they'll find themselves getting sued sooner than later and probably by more than one company.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=494883

I'm not sure how they could argue that they aren't directly profiting off of Google's TM. The people who are trying to go to those non-existent subdomains are obviously attempting to access Google's site, be it unsuccessfully. I would imagine in most cases, these attempts are due to typos of an existing subdomain.

exactly, they have just typo squatted every domain in existence.

shockie · 07-21-2008, 01:46 AM

my goodness. serving up ads on a non-existent subdomain is absolutely pushing it. everyone should stick to directories instead of subdomains if this bullsh_t keeps up.

is there some way to return 301s or 302s for wildcard subdomains through mod_rewrite?

jberryhill · 07-22-2008, 01:19 AM

Quote:

You can just imagine how much cash they are bringing in from these types of deals.

I'll bet you can't.

According to people with indirect knowledge of the numbers at Verizon - in order to imagine the cash flow, you're going to have to invest in a bigger imagination first.

07-20-2008, 01:26 PM	THREAD STARTER #1 (permalink)
dgridley NamePros Legend Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: SW Missouri Posts: 18,342 Follow @davew3b	Rogers Hijacks DNS, Puts Yahoo! Ads on Google's Subdomains Rogers, a huge cable internet provider in Canada, has decided to hijack all unregistered domains, and replace them with Yahoo! advertisements. This means Rogers users who type in a domain that doesn't exist, are now getting Yahoo ads instead of the normal "not found" error. http://blamcast.net/articles/rogers-hijacks-dns Wow.. Google's not gonna like that. __________________ davew3b tumblr blog \| davew3b posterous blog

07-20-2008, 01:52 PM	#2 (permalink)
gjvblack NamePros Regular Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 276	Looks like Google AND Yahoo are going to be pissed. This would bring in hundreds of dollars in revenue though for all those ads. Wonder what will happen when Google finds out, im pretty sure Google can take them down... __________________ Online Security & Web Design

07-20-2008, 02:25 PM	#5 (permalink)
gjvblack NamePros Regular Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 276	True, but can google still ban their sites? or sue them for this? __________________ Online Security & Web Design

07-20-2008, 02:27 PM	THREAD STARTER #6 (permalink)
dgridley NamePros Legend Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: SW Missouri Posts: 18,342 Follow @davew3b	You can sue someone for anything.. be interesting to see how this plays out. Roger's legal team must have looked into the legality before hand, I'd think. http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...rs+hijacks+dns __________________ davew3b tumblr blog \| davew3b posterous blog

07-20-2008, 04:25 PM	#7 (permalink)
Steven Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Namepros.com Posts: 3,456	I was wondering what that site was about... I'm using Rogers, and I get this annoying page when I type in the wrong domain. http://www20.search.rogers.com/searc...ammeplease.com __________________ Domain Name

07-20-2008, 05:30 PM	#8 (permalink)
matt_bodis Bodis.com Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 2,591	They didn't hijack DNS. This is a deal that most ISPs have with either Yahoo or Google. Verizon DSL has the same deal with Yahoo: http://wwwz.websearch.verizon.net/se...mDonnl39uLnSH5

07-20-2008, 06:37 PM	#10 (permalink)
matt_bodis Bodis.com Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 2,591	Well Verizon only shows the ads on non-registered domain names, so the Rogers setup is a bit different. You can just imagine how much cash they are bringing in from these types of deals.

07-20-2008, 06:51 PM	#11 (permalink)
Jackie Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 1,575	Use an alternative DNS provider like http://opendns.com/ if you don't like it. It's free. ISPs, ideally, should give subscribers the choice to opt-out though. __________________ Mobile Phones & Tablets @ MobilePhonesTablets.com The COMPANION for Android, iOS, WP7, BB QNX, and WebOS Users Buy Real Estate Properties Residential & Commercial Real Estate

07-20-2008, 08:19 PM	#12 (permalink)
Ronald Regging Ex-President Join Date: May 2006 Location: Mount Joy, PA Posts: 2,652	If they were just serving up ads on non-existent domains, that would be one thing. However, by including non-existent subdomains on established domains, I think they'll find themselves getting sued sooner than later and probably by more than one company. I'm not sure how they could argue that they aren't directly profiting off of Google's TM. The people who are trying to go to those non-existent subdomains are obviously attempting to access Google's site, be it unsuccessfully. I would imagine in most cases, these attempts are due to typos of an existing subdomain.

07-21-2008, 01:46 AM	#14 (permalink)
shockie Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,702	my goodness. serving up ads on a non-existent subdomain is absolutely pushing it. everyone should stick to directories instead of subdomains if this bullsh_t keeps up. is there some way to return 301s or 302s for wildcard subdomains through mod_rewrite? __________________ - shockie

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)