GoDaddy takes away domain use from owner when asked to do by MySpace! Awful...

[woeger]

GoDaddy yanked a person's domain from resolving without any notice (per the account owner) for content on the domain that MySpace objected to. No court order - nada, just from a complaint.

This is a free speech issue and in my opinion shows just how anti-customer rights Godaddy is. See more on this NEWS.COM article about Godaddy's action concerning this one domain:

http://news.com.com/GoDaddy+pulls+s...laints/2100-1025_3-6153607.html?tag=nefd.lede

All GoDaddy customer should take this as a warning shot about how Bob Parson's company will apparently not be looking out for them and their interests, but rather bowing to companys' requests to deactivate or perhaps even delete domains. Your domains do not appear to be safe at GoDaddy...

I recommend switching any domains of value to another registrar that cares about your domain ownership rights ASAP (such as Moniker or other reliable registrars).

 

[Damion]

Not even THEN in my opinion since it would be a pointless action from GD since the list was and is spread out all over the net.
Would it really help to plug a hole in a bucket of water that is full of holes?

Plugging one hole does not fix the problem although they want it to appear as if it was so responsible from their part and they made a difference.
Myspace demonstrated a flawed contingency plan in case of a security breach and GD dribbled along.

 

[dotnom]

If you witness someone push an old lady down
and they attempt to steal her purse,
do you say "well, that's the cops job"
or do you stop the jerk yourself?

I guess GoDaddy didn't risk to take a shot at his head with a possible hidden gun, right ?

Nice example let me give you another one
If you make a prank from your home's phone the telco takes back your number or just face the consequence of your actions by the law (if your prank resulted to an illegal action)

I too like Superman but let's not try to be Supermen. Think logical.
Domains are like Telephone Numbers can't and shouldn't shut down

Anyone who doesn't understand the severity of GoDaddy's action and the pointless and dangerous solution he gave then i assume he doesn't understand that the first step clear the road for the second step and so on

I'm not interested for the specific incident but for the future of domains in general. If this trend pass and spread to all registrars then it will heart all domain community, both legitimate and not so legitimate
It will hurt newbies and buyers trust to domains, it will fill endless conversations with what is right and what is not

Let's not make the domain name representatives of the content or the other way around

Protect your domains, let the law decide. Forget the law, forget everything

Not even THEN in my opinion since it would be a pointless action from GD since the list was and is spread out all over the net.
Would it really help to plug a hole in a bucket of water that is full of holes?

Plugging one hole does not fix the problem although they want it to appear as if it was so responsible from their part and they made a difference.
Myspace demonstrated a flawed contingency plan in case of a security breach and GD dribbled along.

SO logical and still so many people don't get it

 

[shockie]

let the law decide. Forget the law, forget everything

LOL, it seems that you have actually forgotten that gd has every legal right to do what they did. it's hilarious that you still think that what they did was unlawful.

 

[dotnom]

LOL 2 : You ignore that the quoting comment is for general issues and not for the God GoDaddy

Please review my posts from the start and re-read the spots where i say (I know it's according to their TOS)

To choose if they will host or not your domains is according to their GoDaddy's TOS to hold hostage your domain to their service because they like it is not

shockie : Do you have a partner for dailydomainer or your favorite character is "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" ?

In namepros you support the right of our good old GoDaddy and in your daily domainer site you say :

GoDaddy vs. NoDaddy
Fyodor Vaskovich, the owner of the domain name that GoDaddy shut down for seven hours on January 24, has set up a website that is “exposing the many reasons not to trust GoDaddy with your domain names”. The site is located at NoDaddy.com

Few innocent victims of crooked domain registrars dare to speak out in public, and even if they do, they rarely get the audience they need to make a real difference.

That’s why the Daily Domainer supports Fyodor. While GoDaddy might have grown too big to care about this backlash, we hope that Fyodor’s efforts will send a message to all registrars to be more careful with unjustified domain deactivations in the future

 

[shockie]

1) *coughs*

If there is no law broken GD is not authorized to take any action that may cost the business reputation/future of anyone

but now you admit that what gd did was in fact completely, without a doubt, undeniably authorized. good job. now are you saying that what gd did was unethical? are citizens' arrests unethical? if what gd did was neither illegal, nor unethical, then was it wrong?

i don't see taking down a website with other people's passwords as inappropriate use of their [gd's] power.

do you agree or disagree with the above statement?

2)

in your daily domainer site you say

now i don't know whether it's just a bad translation from whatever your native language is, but this in itself is wrong.

 

[JimCato.com]

hmmm

how mush are Gd paying you shockie???


Gd should take care of theier customers, they also need larger balls

 

[Amnezia]

godaddy are always doing things like this, it doesn't exactly surprise me

 

[dotnom]

shockie you turn the topic to a loop, i can't say the same again and again
Your questions are already covered

Even if my native language is Martian i really can't follow your concept
What has to do people's arrest with this ?
Is there also a people's court or people's jail or people's judge and i don't know?

Sorry from all of you humans for my Martian nationality but i thought you humans believe in laws. Marvel and DC harm you
shockie you picked a nice nickname, you are indeed shock me with your ideas but that's ok, i guess you are free to protect GoDaddy if you think it's right

Sometimes we see the tree and can't see the forest

 

[shockie]

well i guess if you knew what a citizen's arrest was then you would understand. it seems that you do not though. oh well.

and you're right, the discussion is really over. simply put, putting up others' passwords is wrong. following the law is right. which is why whenever i hear people complaining about gd here, they are basically victimizing themselves and hating gd simply because they are the biggest. well boohoo. still doesn't make putting other people's passwords up right. which is why all of you whiners have never addressed that.

btw kenom, you have a bunch of english mistakes all over your website. you might want to address those as well. LOL!!

 

[Damion]

putting up others' passwords is wrong. following the law is right. which of those statements do you disagree with?

Interesting you put this in your sig Shockie.
I guess laws can't be wrongfully implemented in your point of view, the law is always right? right?

 

[shockie]

lol, ok granted, laws aren't perfect.

but in this particular case, i find it hard for anyone to really justify the fact that parsons himself didn't show up at the guy's door asking him to take down the list. and then it's somewhat odd that some are giving the whole "well i would have taken it down in a few hours... etc" argument. no offense, but they were the ones who had the bright idea of putting up the list on their site in the first place, so do forgive if the rest of us would rather gd to use their power responsibly and take down the site.

 

[Damion]

no offense, but they were the ones who had the bright idea of putting up the list on their site in the first place,

You do realize it was content that is submitted not by the owner of the website in question and it was never his intention to publicly put up security sensitive material on his website.

So to put this forward as an intended action from the owner of the website that was taken down is not really fair from your part.

 

[shockie]

oh i see... well then shouldn't the owner be thanking gd?... lol
maybe from now on they will maintain and moderate their own website so that their registrar doesn't have to

 

[Damion]

No he shouldn't be to answer your question.

Let me ask you this question - Do you feel Myspace thought there was a matter of immediate urgency to see the list removed from SecLists.org?

 

[shockie]

i feel that myspace was acting in the best interest of its members and naturally represented them in telling gd about it. it should be safe to assume that myspace shouldn't and didn't casually approach gd about this.

 

[Damion]

That is not really an answer to my question but nevermind.

i feel that myspace was acting in the best interest of its members

I can pick it up from here.
If Myspace was genuinely interested in the interest of their members they should have temporarily closed down Myspace and do a reset for all the passwords for all their members.

Put up a notice on their site with an explanation that they have done the resetting to ensure the safety of their userbase.
All users will be notified by email that their password has been reset as well and will receive a one time password.

Following that...An application would be installed to evaluate the strength of the password if once more reset by the user, the initial password issued by Myspace would be a one time password that needs to be reset by the user.

Problem solved.

Instead what Myspace has done is to react to a situation that needed responded to in a quick and adequate manor in a delayed and incompetent manor.

The password list is still to be found and Myspace user passwords are still to be compromised.
The action of Godaddy did nothing to aid in protecting Myspace users, instead because of their action the knowledge of the existence of such a password list has broadened.

Do you feel Google should be shut down entirely as well Shockie?

 

[shockie]

If Myspace was genuinely interested in the interest of their members they should have temporarily closed down Myspace and do a reset for all the passwords for all their members.

Do you feel Google should be shut down entirely as well Shockie?

well if you're suggesting that myspace should shut down their entire site then the right answer extrapolating from your suggestion would be yes, google should be shut down completely.

however, i for one disagree that myspace should've shut down their site completely, and i disagree that google should shut down completely as well. if your opinion is the opposite, then so be it. it's little strange though... DAMION

 

[enlytend]

If Myspace was genuinely interested in the interest of their members they should have temporarily closed down Myspace and do a reset for all the passwords for all their members.

Put up a notice on their site with an explanation that they have done the resetting to ensure the safety of their userbase.
All users will be notified by email that their password has been reset as well and will receive a one time password.

Following that...An application would be installed to evaluate the strength of the password if once more reset by the user, the initial password issued by Myspace would be a one time password that needs to be reset by the user.

two more ...

4) Since their user names are email addresses, notify the providers of the email accounts (Yahoo, AOL, et al) - so many people use 1 password for everything.

5) Last but not least, take a good, long, hard look at their own code and change the parts which make it easy for someone to put such a rudimentary phish in place to begin with!!!!!

Taking this course of action 9 days after the exploit went public smells like a PR move on the part of MySpace to attempt to cover their own sorry a**es.

Plugging one hole does not fix the problem although they want it to appear as if it was so responsible from their part and they made a difference.

Well put!

 

[HeavyDuty]

This subject has been analyzed to death. Elements of the contract (TOS) were exercised by GoDaddy. Period. There are no 'what ifs?', 'buts' or 'maybe's' contained in the TOS. Any prudent business owner would have done similar to safeguard their business from potential legal repercussions.

"You do realize it was content that is submitted not by the owner of the website in question and it was never his intention to publicly put up security sensitive material on his website."

That is a ridiculous comment. The web site owner is responsible for the web site content. Period. If he/they chose to operate it unmonitored and unmoderated then they've taken a very irresponsible business approach.

 

[Damion]

well if you're suggesting that myspace should shut down their entire site then the right answer extrapolating from your suggestion would be yes, google should be shut down completely.

So since you where extrapolating, you feel that Google should be shut down if Myspace is not accessible anymore at all, due to security revisions?
Now that is strange...why would you want to do that?

A password list at that point is rendered completely useless for anyone trying to use it no matter where someone found it.
Also Google is not responsible for Myspace failure to maintain a secure environment.

however, i for one disagree that myspace should've shut down their site completely, and i disagree that google should shut down completely as well. if your opinion is the opposite, then so be it. it's little strange though... DAMION

The opposite of my disagreement in your above words used is directed at Myspace because i do feel that Myspace should have closed the whole site and should have taken appropriate action (described as above) to protect it's userbase.


What is it what you find so strange?

 

[HeavyDuty]

...Taking this course of action 9 days after the exploit went public smells like a PR move on the part of MySpace to attempt to cover their own sorry a**es.

Does have a bit of a smell to it

 

[dotnom]

What is it what you find so strange?

I guess the fact that still GoDaddy or Myspace didn't hire him with so good support he offers

 

[Damion]

This subject has been analyzed to death. Elements of the contract (TOS) were exercised by GoDaddy. Period. There are no 'what ifs?', 'buts' or 'maybe's' contained in the TOS. Any prudent business owner would have done similar to safeguard their business from potential legal repercussions.

And this is where the whole debacle is based on...the unethical manor of Godaddy practices derived from their TOS.
Legal repercussions?

There is no way in this particular case the responsibility of the security of Myspace rests on Godaddy. It rests on Myspace which they failed to handle in a responsible manor.

"You do realize it was content that is submitted not by the owner of the website in question and it was never his intention to publicly put up security sensitive material on his website."[/QUOTE]

That is a ridiculous comment. The web site owner is responsible for the web site content. Period. If he/they chose to operate it unmonitored and unmoderated then they've taken a very irresponsible business approach.

That comment you quoted is not at all ridiculous since it was in reply to shockies unfair statement that the website owner

no offense, but they were the ones who had the bright idea of putting up the list on their site in the first place,

Please don't take things out of context.

 

[mis_chiff]

Here's a thought...if it was mentioned - then I missed it!


When you submit passwords (or sensitive info) you are expecting a level
of privacy IE: We will not share - We do not sell - etc etc...
most people are content with that and trust the source they
are giving the info to.
When someone decides to publish the info - by whatever means- then it
is a clear violation of whomever those passwords were submitted to,(which was in confidence with a level of privacy)! the fact this guy published this info on the web??
who gave him permission to use it...HE should be the one everyone is after
NOT Godaddy for trying to prevent the info for getting out there farther -
This is my 2 cents and I am entitled to it!
Anywhere I put private info is just that...private info - if you decide to publish it - then it's you I'd be looking for - with a big THANK YOU to Godaddy for catching it and shutting it down!!!!
:imho:

Have a great day!

 

[shockie]

thanks for your post at 12.42 because i had no idea what you were saying at 12.35. actually i don't think i completely understand 12.42 either.

now we already know that what gd did is completely legal,
1) but how is what gd did unethical??

i like how you play on the technicality of who uploaded or provided the list to seclists.
2) but is the owner not ultimately responsible for what is on his/her website??

and sure of course myspace should take responsible action for its members.
3) but doesn't one of those actions include telling gd about the published passwords??

three answers please. and please try to keep them relatively short.