191–200 of 261 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin Distributed DNS is the only solution
It doesn't serve No-IP's market, because No-IP is for frequently changing IP addresses. Namecoin charges for each record change, to my knowledge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't serve No-IP's market, because No-IP is for frequently changing IP addresses. Namecoin charges for each record change, to my knowledge.
How often are updates necessary? It costs 0.8 cents to update a namecoin domain.
It's just plain outrageous that this court order was granted. It essentially puts no-ip out of business when they were not complicit in anything illegal. It took me 5 minutes to switch my completely legitimate hosts over to ddns.net. I'm sure the evil botnet owners have backup hostnames and will do the same, or more likely switch to another provider entirely. The end result will be a short-lived dip in criminal activ…
Unfortunately .net is also under the jurisdiction of US courts so it's not any 'safer' from seizure
The registry for .info and .mobi is in Ireland, .me is Serbia and Montenegro. Might be worth looking for dynamic DNS options in those TLDs if you seek future-proofing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is almost like giving one company monopoly control of the personal computer industry through a proprietary OS nobody can audit might not be the best plan.
Not necessarily "nobody". They do have a shared source program: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/default.aspx
Loads of self-congratulating tripe. Microsoft why don't you simply provide free OS upgrades or fixes for the millions of XP computers out there? They are not going anywhere soon. Next thing we know your lawyers and lobbyists are going to come up with some legislative wheeze and you will be running the biggest botnet in the world. You created the problem so fix it yourself.
Probably because Windows XP is well over 10 years old. You can't possibly expect them to support it forever just because some organisations can't be bothered to upgrade.
To throw the towel in on an OS which has the same subset API as a recent one yet has many minor incompatibilities through shoddy API design (win32) is a shitty business model which people shouldn't have to shovel cash at over and over again.
To hell with them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wholly predictable downvoting by anonymously cowardly Microsoft brown-nosers.
Downvoted you. And Apple should be providing free updates to people still using 10.1 Puma. - signed, owner of an iMac, two rMBPs, two iPhone 5Ss, two iPad Airs and an Apple TV (no Microsoft brown-nose here).
Today that didn't happen.
I had originally blamed no-ip for this...
To me, Microsoft seems to be the bully and is now actually guilty of conduct No-IP was only peripherally involved in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an ex parte order, so presumably Vitalwerks didn't show up in court despite the summons? If you filed for a TRO against Microsoft and their lawyers ignored it, something bad might happen to them too.
Ex parte means "from (by or for) one party", the judge acts upon the moving party's request without hearing from the other party. They are supposed to be rare and meet a high bar -- generally involving emergencies (and occasionally involving actions that need to remain secret). Given that the allegations span many months, it's hard to see how it was an appropriate form of action here. I'd be very interested to see if…
> On June 26, the court granted our request and made Microsoft the DNS authority for the company’s 23 free No-IP domains, allowing us to identify and route all known bad traffic to the Microsoft sinkhole and classify the identified threats. Something about this bothers me. So the courts granted MS the rights to essentially take over No-IP's DNS in order to "identify" ... "bad traffic?" The implications of this are...…
I doubt No-IP will settle out of court. They'll probably countersue - they have nothing to lose, and that sounds like a company lawyering up and getting ready to kick ass - and I'd expect they'd ask for very big, even punitive damages. The $200k bond isn't even two orders of magnitude enough to hedge against MS literally destroying their business, in what may have been an ultimately well-intentioned, but spectacularly reckless, action.
How long until MS reverse the DNS changes, I wonder, especially given they can't keep up and they're all effectively down? 12 hours? 24?
It's no surprise, btw, that domains in US jurisdiction are under US jurisdiction.
We could use some more TLDs that aren't, I think, and I've held for some time that the root DNS should be held by some kind of international treaty entity acting as IANA.