221–230 of 261 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same here, I was confused this afternoon when my home vpn hosted on a servebeer.com subdomain wouldn't connect. Now it makes a lot more sense, but I'm left with a very bad taste in my mouth.
Buy your own domain, preferably with a company outside the US. I use gandi.net and http://code.google.com/p/gandi-automatic-dns/ It's more expensive, but you control it.
Hardly. Any domain in the existing domain name system can be seized.
> 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...…
Reminds me of the old days of communism when you could have your "property" sized since legally speaking everything belonged to the state.
And no you can't say this is different because the courts ordered it since no-ip was not given a chance to defend itself.
How much would like to bet Microsoft presented the case as some rogue Arab sounding names(terrorists?) running shady bot-nets in cooperation with no-ip a company obviously involved in that criminal activity.
Not the largest and well known freed DNS provider in the world that happens to be used by a large number of bot-nets as well.
If this is ok I'm sure you could find millions of reasons to seize goggles domains like indexing warez sites or websites like the pirate bay.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fine. I downvoted you, and it's no longer anonymous. I downvoted you because both of your comments were filled with passionate garbage rather than any well-reasoned thought. I'd be willing to bet other downvoters were not simply cowardly Microsoft brown-nosers.
Apparently the sheer abuse of power entailed by Microsoft hijacking and disrupting the inbound traffic of a lot of innocent no-ip customers to track the few C&C servers is entirely lost on you. If something like that is to be done it should be done by a state body, not a private corporation. What gives them the right to spy on innocent peoples traffic? Did the judges even understand the nature of the power they were…
What I don't understand and haven't seen anyone ask is, why Microsoft? I mean, obviously some shady legal tactics are at work here, but why did Microsoft got to control those domains instead of, Mozilla for example? or Google? even more so, why wasn't control transferred to ICE for example? Not saying it's a better alternative or even that I agree with it, but it's very VERY unsettling (and I'm not even American) tha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fine. I downvoted you, and it's no longer anonymous. I downvoted you because both of your comments were filled with passionate garbage rather than any well-reasoned thought. I'd be willing to bet other downvoters were not simply cowardly Microsoft brown-nosers.
Apparently the sheer abuse of power entailed by Microsoft hijacking and disrupting the inbound traffic of a lot of innocent no-ip customers to track the few C&C servers is entirely lost on you. If something like that is to be done it should be done by a state body, not a private corporation. What gives them the right to spy on innocent peoples traffic? Did the judges even understand the nature of the power they were…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Buy your own domain, preferably with a company outside the US. I use gandi.net and http://code.google.com/p/gandi-automatic-dns/ It's more expensive, but you control it.
>you control it. Hardly. Any domain in the existing domain name system can be seized.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You now actually need to specifically open the application with a right click to even have the option to open it, simply double clicking just says it's unsafe and closes. I think that safeguard probably has saved significant numbers of people from unsavory malware.
That's the very first option everyone turns off because it gets in the way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that close to what happened to Mega Upload and domain handed over to the government?
Of course a court can seize domains. But if an investigation follows, it should be carried out by the police, not by private companies (and especially not by the plaintiff). At least that's what I'd expect from a constitutional state ;-)
If people gave the money they can (at least in England) mount a private criminal prosecution. That's very rare, but it does happen.
I'm pleased that MS is doing this. So long as it stays open, scrutinised by the courts, and restricted to massive malware botnets the results are good for almost everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Next time, read the rest of the article? > Microsoft has seen more than 7.4 million Bladabindi-Jenxcus detections over the past 12 months, which doesn’t account for detections by other anti-virus providers. Despite numerous reports by the security community on No-IP domain abuse, the company has not taken sufficient steps to correct, remedy, prevent or control the abuse or help keep its domains safe from malicious ac…
> Sure, it's creepy when courts have control over DNS entries, but ... they do. In this case it was a US court and between two US companies, what if no-ip.com was French or UK or... Would the US court still have authority in this case? Would MS have to go to a French / UK court?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "look, i make billions while you make a few thousands, but please, go ahead and change your service because it is impacting my billion dollar windows sales and i can't be bothered to patching it on my product" How can they patch it in their product without turning desktop Windows into something like iOS or Windows Phone/RT? Even Android has a ton of malware so the notion that Windows is somehow more hole ridden tha…
Linux solved this problem almost twenty years ago. You have a package manager that does not contain malware and does contain 95% of the software any user would install on a regular basis, and you make the process of installing software outside of the package manager possible but not trivial . You download a binary and it doesn't have the execute bit set, and you don't get any kind of friendly thing that pops up to as…
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/how-much-more-malware-is-...
If Linux were to get as popular as Windows, the problem is going to way worse.
Also, there's lot of Android malware that's installed from outside the app store, typically for piracy reasons which is another big malware vector on Windows.