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

Never buy a .online domain

0xsid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 513 posts

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#361

Post by donmcronald »

retired wrote: post #263
otterley wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(IAAL but this is not legal advice.) It’s not libel. Defamation requires a false statement of fact. Marking a website as “unsafe” is an opinion.

Marking a website as "unsafe" in Chrome is equal to standing in front of the door of a small restaurant and blocking 71% of people going inside. Everyone first has to agree that they will enter the restaurant at their own risk. That is more than an opinion. Chrome has a monopoly and should act accordingly. Blocking entry to a website should be a last resort, not just because someone didn't add their website to the wh…

Yeah. Everyone uses their list and being blocked by all web browsers is like having someone cover the doorway with a massive DANGER sign. It's insane that people are roaming around here arguing that it's ok because the damage caused is a necessity for "internet scale".

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#362

Post by technothrasher »

altairprime wrote: post #329
NikolaNovak wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I've found, occasionally the hard way, is that helpful bystanders are always offering advice based on "ethical", "intuitive", "logical" and "common sense", usually without any aspect of "legal". I got divorced a decade ago, and every well-wishing person in my life was strongly urging me to do things which were shockingly counter-productive / dangerous / wrong, based on their confident understanding (assumpt…

IAN Y L, though! Offering legal advice with the disclaimer “I am not a lawyer” could be prosecuted as practicing law if a reasonably party could still infer a potential lawyer-client relationship from your message and/or intent. Instead, “I am not your lawyer” explicitly denies the lawyer-client relationship, which closes the door on both being accused of practicing law illegally and on being found as party to a lawy…

> closes the door on [...] being accused of practicing law illegally

Does it? So I can say, "I'm not your lawyer, but I'm happy to go ahead and give you specific legal advice on your case." and I can't be accused of illegally practicing law? I was under the impression that this could still get you into hot water. But not being your lawyer, due to the fact that I am not a lawyer at all, I don't know if it is true or not.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#363

Post by josephg »

kstrauser wrote: post #166
delecti wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried sending them emails asking/telling them to stop?

I’m a different person, but this happens to me, too. I have the kstrauser@yahoo.com email address because I signed up for it like 25 years ago. I log in every 6 months to see what the few other kstrausers in the world have signed me up for. Not jsmith, but kstrauser. Not Gmail, but Yahoo. And I still get banking docs, and HOA meeting minutes, and birthday party invitations, and Facebook logins, and other bizarre rand…

Yeah I have josephg@gmail. The amount of spam that account gets is wild - about 50-100 emails hit the inbox per day. I got soft-locked out of google docs a few months ago because my google account's 25gb quota was exhausted.

Some of the emails are really unfortunate stuff. "Your account was added as a backup address." - Then inevitably, a few weeks later, dozens of password reset emails. Sorry bud. I've received pay stubs. Orders and invoices. I get phone bills every month for someone in India. Its chaos.

Early on I'd sometimes reply to these random emails telling people they've got the wrong address. The most astonishing reply I ever got was from HSBC bank telling me I needed to come into the branch to change my email address. Over the course of a week, I explained about 3 times that that was impossible. That I live in Australia. That I'm not their customer, and its not my account. Eventually they told me they were disabling online banking on my account. Now I've given up replying at all.

Send emails into that pit of PII misery if you want. I don't read them.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#364

Post by retired »

donmcronald wrote: post #361
retired wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marking a website as "unsafe" in Chrome is equal to standing in front of the door of a small restaurant and blocking 71% of people going inside. Everyone first has to agree that they will enter the restaurant at their own risk. That is more than an opinion. Chrome has a monopoly and should act accordingly. Blocking entry to a website should be a last resort, not just because someone didn't add their website to the wh…

Yeah. Everyone uses their list and being blocked by all web browsers is like having someone cover the doorway with a massive DANGER sign. It's insane that people are roaming around here arguing that it's ok because the damage caused is a necessity for "internet scale".

Indeed. It is almost like how the Mafia operates. This person didn't submit his website to Google and now Google blocks visitors.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#365

Post by agentifysh »

mdhen wrote: post #360
agentifysh wrote: post #359

Does anybody know any good alternative to Name Cheap? It seems like they keep raising prices on all the domains. Website is very sluggish, especially for finding domains quickly.

cloudflare is the cheapest - they do it at cost.

Wow, thanks. You were right. I Googled and it says Cloudflare is cheaper by twenty-five to fifty percent on renewals. I'm really sick of namecheap. They seem to never stop raising prices. but I'm also I'm kinda wary and afraid of moving domains and losing it.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#366

Post by deepsun »

Telaneo wrote: post #332
deepsun wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fundamentally, this was google's fault Or yours, for not caring about 2FA. It's been a common practice for many years, and strongly recommended by most identity services, as well as OWASP and NIST recommendations. What would you do in Google's place?

Not add 2fa automatically, but instead prompt with options to add it. This probably doesn't comply with the relevant recommendations, but cutting a user of from their email is worse in my opinion.

I'm sure Google prompted author for years begging to turn the 2FA on, as well as warning that they will enforce it on day X. Author ignored them all.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#367

Post by deepsun »

saidnooneever wrote: post #344
deepsun wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fundamentally, this was google's fault Or yours, for not caring about 2FA. It's been a common practice for many years, and strongly recommended by most identity services, as well as OWASP and NIST recommendations. What would you do in Google's place?

nonsense. any feature should have acceptable failure modes. blaming the customer for a fault they have no control over is not acceptable. many people know nothing about 2FA. it is not their responsibility. 2FA is a symptom of shitty designed systems which are inherently insecure and companies who dont give a shit about that and let their customers shoulder the burden by shoving complexity down their throats. if you m…

> many people know nothing about 2FA

That's why Google sent them multiple emails explaining what it is and recommending to turn it on. What else could Google do?

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#368

Post by otterley »

donmcronald wrote: post #361
retired wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marking a website as "unsafe" in Chrome is equal to standing in front of the door of a small restaurant and blocking 71% of people going inside. Everyone first has to agree that they will enter the restaurant at their own risk. That is more than an opinion. Chrome has a monopoly and should act accordingly. Blocking entry to a website should be a last resort, not just because someone didn't add their website to the wh…

Yeah. Everyone uses their list and being blocked by all web browsers is like having someone cover the doorway with a massive DANGER sign. It's insane that people are roaming around here arguing that it's ok because the damage caused is a necessity for "internet scale".

Right now, any damages are completely speculative at this point. I would suspect in this case, the damages are minimal, and taken in the broader context, the good outweighs the harm. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#369

Post by deepsun »

mindslight wrote: post #341
deepsun wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fundamentally, this was google's fault Or yours, for not caring about 2FA. It's been a common practice for many years, and strongly recommended by most identity services, as well as OWASP and NIST recommendations. What would you do in Google's place?

Not force nonconsensual authentication methods onto users. Google is one of the rare places I actually see positive value to 2FA. Compare with say banks, where it being demanded actually decreases my security. But regardless, it should not be forced.

But then millions of users would stay unprotected from password sealing (see https://haveibeenpwned.com/).

They certainly did a proper thing forcing people to use 2FA AFTER multiple emails over the years recommending to turn it on, and warning that they will enforce it, which they did.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#370

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

rationalist wrote: post #81
NikolaNovak wrote: post #22

Oh man. The infinite loops of impossible verification by large companies that should know better are massive pain peeve of mine. This goes right to the top for me, along the ubiquitous "please verify your account" emails with NO OPTION to click "that's NOT me, somebody misused my email". Either people who do this for a living have no clue how to do their job, or, depressingly more likely, their goals are just complet…

Someone constantly adds my Gmail address as their Gmail account's backup address. I constantly remove it whenever Gmail sends me the notification. I can't help but think there is some method for the other person to steal my Gmail account if I never remove my email as their backup.

I have an "OG" mac.com account (got it about five minutes after Steve announced it). My wife actually has her first name.

We both get hit with "OG Hell," where people are constantly entering our emails. I think most time, it is accidental (maybe they meant "XXX1234", and forgot the number).

What makes it worse, is that Apple aliases mac.com, icloud.com, and me.com together, and there's no way to turn off one of the aliases.

mac.com is really in retirement. No one sets up new ones, but the miscreants typo icloud.com, which gets routed to me.

I have a rule, where I shitcan every mail to icloud.com, but I wish I could simply turn off the forwarder.

Post reply on HN