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

The dark patterns of Network Solutions

coywolf.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 30 posts

Re: The dark patterns of Network Solutions

#21

Post by Mattasher »

sam0x17 wrote: post #20

Not sure if this is still true but in the early 2010s I documented several scenarios where searching for a domain on network solutions (but not purchasing) resulted in it getting automatically purchased and parked with network solutions, with a list price of $500.

Front-running domains was a huge issue with registrars. Not sure sure if it still is. Registries were allowed a grace period to hold names without paying the ICANN fee, if they later released them, the idea being they might have been bought with a bad credit card etc so the registry would just let them go. No harm no foul, right?

Re: The dark patterns of Network Solutions

#22

Post by jart »

jcrawfordor wrote: post #11

NetworkSolutions has an interesting history of having been fortunate enough to be issued a monopoly by the US Government in the early days of the internet. This placed them firmly into the defense industrial complex, and for a time they were a subsidiary of major defense contractor SAIC/Leidos. Ultimately, though, NS cranked up rates so high that complaints from industry were a big factor in precipitating the formati…

> NS cranked up rates so high that complaints from industry were a big factor

Maybe complaints from domain squatters. I wish domains still cost $100/year. Before that, you had to know Jon Postel to get one. If everyone can buy something for 50 cents then it doesn't have a whole lot of prestige anymore. If a domain costs 50 cents then all you're doing is attracting the sorts of people who only want to contribute 50 cents of value. What would have happened if that had been the government's policy during the western homesteading era? Expensive means the people who buy will be likely to use rather than squat. Expensive means you could get a good domain without having to buy from random guy. Expensive means people become more creative with the way they use domains. For example, I thought it was cool the way universities used to buy a single top-level domain, and then delegate sub-domain authority to departments, and they could delegate fourth level labels. That can't happen anymore because browser security policies evolved under the assumption that second level domains are cheap so it's no longer possible to have meaningful boundaries within a domain. So because of speculation we have a more fragile internet.

Re: The dark patterns of Network Solutions

#23

Post by bhartzer »

classichasclass wrote: post #3

It took a whole mess of domains getting stolen for them to add even some token level of 2FA, too (mine was one of them and it took nearly a day to get it back; others like Perl.com weren't so lucky). I have only one domain left with them and I don't intend to renew.

I run a domain name recovery service and I can’t begin to tell you how many domains have been stolen from network solutions. We are still finding out about them every day, when the domain owners finally realize they don’t own their domain anymore.

Re: The dark patterns of Network Solutions

#24

Post by ironSkillet »

Animats wrote: post #16
OrvalWintermute wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like some evil MBAs have taken over the company, and decided to monetize each and every customer interaction, including access to your inbox.

In 2011, Network Solutions was acquired by Web.com, from Verisign. Things got much worse.

I worked for a company that also got acquired by Web.com. They definitely replaced technical leadership with MBA types.

Re: The dark patterns of Network Solutions

#25

Post by joezydeco »

jart wrote: post #22
jcrawfordor wrote: post #11

NetworkSolutions has an interesting history of having been fortunate enough to be issued a monopoly by the US Government in the early days of the internet. This placed them firmly into the defense industrial complex, and for a time they were a subsidiary of major defense contractor SAIC/Leidos. Ultimately, though, NS cranked up rates so high that complaints from industry were a big factor in precipitating the formati…

> NS cranked up rates so high that complaints from industry were a big factor Maybe complaints from domain squatters. I wish domains still cost $100/year. Before that, you had to know Jon Postel to get one. If everyone can buy something for 50 cents then it doesn't have a whole lot of prestige anymore. If a domain costs 50 cents then all you're doing is attracting the sorts of people who only want to contribute 50 ce…

I wish domains still cost $100/year. Before that, you had to know Jon Postel to get one

I can't be the only one that remembers the (free) email robot that would assign domains in the early 90s. And I don't know Postel.

Re: The dark patterns of Network Solutions

#26

Post by kloch »

joezydeco wrote: post #25
jart wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NS cranked up rates so high that complaints from industry were a big factor Maybe complaints from domain squatters. I wish domains still cost $100/year. Before that, you had to know Jon Postel to get one. If everyone can buy something for 50 cents then it doesn't have a whole lot of prestige anymore. If a domain costs 50 cents then all you're doing is attracting the sorts of people who only want to contribute 50 ce…

I wish domains still cost $100/year. Before that, you had to know Jon Postel to get one I can't be the only one that remembers the (free) email robot that would assign domains in the early 90s. And I don't know Postel.

My first few domain names were registered in 1995 when the turn-around time on the email template was about three weeks. I barely missed registering kl.com. There was a minor error on my template (name servers). Three weeks later I got the error message and immediately resubmitted but someone else had also submitted a registration in the meantime and theirs was processed before mine. I had to settle for kl.net.

Re: The dark patterns of Network Solutions

#28

Post by logbiscuitswave »

joezydeco wrote: post #25
jart wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NS cranked up rates so high that complaints from industry were a big factor Maybe complaints from domain squatters. I wish domains still cost $100/year. Before that, you had to know Jon Postel to get one. If everyone can buy something for 50 cents then it doesn't have a whole lot of prestige anymore. If a domain costs 50 cents then all you're doing is attracting the sorts of people who only want to contribute 50 ce…

I wish domains still cost $100/year. Before that, you had to know Jon Postel to get one I can't be the only one that remembers the (free) email robot that would assign domains in the early 90s. And I don't know Postel.

I also remember those dark days of having to use those temperamental and brittle email forms. I also remember how the turn around time was measured in days. Better hope you didn’t make any mistakes!

Re: The dark patterns of Network Solutions

#29

Post by LinuxBender »

Animats wrote: post #16
OrvalWintermute wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like some evil MBAs have taken over the company, and decided to monetize each and every customer interaction, including access to your inbox.

In 2011, Network Solutions was acquired by Web.com, from Verisign. Things got much worse.

I agree with this. I had to show their escalation support how to use dig to view public DNS records vs. their own internal DNS. I still have some domains with them, only because all the other registrars seem to be following the same path or have other issues I find even more repulsive. The process to become a registrar is just tedious enough to keep me from doing it.

Re: The dark patterns of Network Solutions

#30

Post by bradknowles »

kloch wrote: post #26
joezydeco wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish domains still cost $100/year. Before that, you had to know Jon Postel to get one I can't be the only one that remembers the (free) email robot that would assign domains in the early 90s. And I don't know Postel.

My first few domain names were registered in 1995 when the turn-around time on the email template was about three weeks. I barely missed registering kl.com. There was a minor error on my template (name servers). Three weeks later I got the error message and immediately resubmitted but someone else had also submitted a registration in the meantime and theirs was processed before mine. I had to settle for kl.net.

It was at roughly that same time that I got ASSIST.MIL (the first CERT for all of DOD) up and running inside the span of a single week.

That was one of my proudest accomplishments during my time as the DISA.MIL Technical POC. That shit wasn’t easy back then.

Post reply on HN