Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sinkholed

susam.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 135 posts

Re: Sinkholed

#51

Post by admax88q »

blunte wrote: post #49

I don't find this surprising at all. This can happen in any scenario where a special shortcut has been added to get around a standard process (where standard process usually involves some human review and judgement). I imagine that in most cases, the shortcuts were created simply to speed up a process where some (perceived) harm is significant, and a rapid change would alleviate this harm. This would allow some enfor…

> This particular situation doesn't bother me as much as the "Google/Apple/FB suddenly closed all my accounts" scenario

This situation bothers me so much more. Google/Apple/FB are private corporations. If they continue to adopt user hostile practices it is possible for some other company to out compete them in the more or less free market of internet services.

TLDs are government controlled entities administering scare resources. I certainly _feel_ like I have much more ownership over my domain name than I do my Google or Facebook account.

Re: Sinkholed

#52

Post by alias_neo »

blunte wrote: post #49

I don't find this surprising at all. This can happen in any scenario where a special shortcut has been added to get around a standard process (where standard process usually involves some human review and judgement). I imagine that in most cases, the shortcuts were created simply to speed up a process where some (perceived) harm is significant, and a rapid change would alleviate this harm. This would allow some enfor…

I hope to see someone come up with a bright solution to this in the near future and post it here.

One of the most terrifying thoughts is that of losing domains to someone who points them at alternative mail servers thus gaining access to everything that uses email for verification.

Re: Sinkholed

#53

Post by monkeynotes »

Someone less technical would likely have no idea what happened to their domain. An individual relying on their web presence for income could be massively impacted by something like this. There really does not seem to be a clear way for someone to a) know what the problem is, and b) get it resolved quickly.

Re: Sinkholed

#54

Post by marcosdumay »

blunte wrote: post #49

I don't find this surprising at all. This can happen in any scenario where a special shortcut has been added to get around a standard process (where standard process usually involves some human review and judgement). I imagine that in most cases, the shortcuts were created simply to speed up a process where some (perceived) harm is significant, and a rapid change would alleviate this harm. This would allow some enfor…

This is not really ok. There must be a clear contact point for the affected people (not only namecheap).

Also it was very bad on the transparency front. If they are taking down a domain, the operation is not secret anymore, so they can tell why. No telling you is bullshit.

That being a German operation, I would expect much better on the democratic handling of it. And it being an international operation, India should have complained that it was badly done too. What would happen if namecheap didn't care?

Re: Sinkholed

#55

Post by antsar »

wodenokoto wrote: post #33

> My website was missing. In fact, the domain name resolved to an IPv4 address I was unfamiliar with. Do you guys know this stuff? If my domain started resolving to a new IP address, that would be just as unfamiliar to me, as the current address. Should I ping my domain and write the results down?

I might not recognize the address. But `whois 12.34.56.78` will tell me whose network it's on. Anything other than my hosting provider would be a red flag. If it's the right company but the site still looks wrong, I'd try to SSH, which would fail because known hosts (see adjacent comment) and also authentication would fail. Then I'd reach for the VM console inside my hosting provider's site, and see the correct/expected address there, and hopefully realize what's up. You could also check your DNS provider, assuming that hasn't been compromised.

It can be a good tradeoff to know where/how to find information rather than actually knowing the information.

Re: Sinkholed

#56

Post by nerdponx »

sandGorgon wrote: post #41
icebraining wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see any mention of a court; the TLD manager (NIXI) probably took the initiative based on said erroneous information.

NIXI is subject to the jusrisdiction of CERT-IN (Indian Computer Emergency Response Team - https://cert-in.org.in/ ), which in turn was one of the participants of the Avalanche takedown program. A legal request originating from Germany would have been approved by CERT-IN and NIXI would have had to comply. https://www.cyberswachhtakendra.gov.in/alerts/avalanche.html

Who said it was a legal request? I got the sense that Shadowserver has some monitoring software running, which triggered a warning for NIXI who sinkholed the domain.

Re: Sinkholed

#57

Post by yosefzeev »

With all the domain buying out and weirdness, it is my fervent hope people seriously begin reconsidering what it means to have a domain name and to implement other structures to serve out names as opposed to the now, obviously bought and sold, DNS.

Re: Sinkholed

#58

Post by ISL »

maroonblazer wrote: post #42
mirimir wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I get that the Shadowserver Foundation does good work. And that they acted quickly, after being pointed to your tweet. However, if your tweet hadn't gotten traction, and if Namecheap hadn't been proactive, you'd likely have never gotten the domain back. I mean, you had the Namecheap CEO on the case! And for a business losing a domain like that, it'd probably be fatal. I get that many think that Americans are hug…

>But arguably your time is worth something. Such as your customary billing rate, times three. Wouldn't the legal fees and time spent litigating exceed the winnings?

In a lawsuit, the fees can be added to the damages.

Re: Sinkholed

#59

Post by sandGorgon »

nerdponx wrote: post #56
sandGorgon wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NIXI is subject to the jusrisdiction of CERT-IN (Indian Computer Emergency Response Team - https://cert-in.org.in/ ), which in turn was one of the participants of the Avalanche takedown program. A legal request originating from Germany would have been approved by CERT-IN and NIXI would have had to comply. https://www.cyberswachhtakendra.gov.in/alerts/avalanche.html

Who said it was a legal request? I got the sense that Shadowserver has some monitoring software running, which triggered a warning for NIXI who sinkholed the domain.

most likely interagency request. NIXI as an Indian govt operator is subject to RTI queries (Right to Information) and court action.

However NIXI is subject to CERT-IN authority which is clearly part of the anti-botnet collective.

Re: Sinkholed

#60

Post by commandlinefan »

> for some perceived violation

This is the fundamental problem with this sort of crowdsourced censorship - there's no accountability on the reporters and no repercussions for bad faith.

Post reply on HN