 
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL | For you Happy Veterans day to all that served!
--
Where have the adults gone? | |
| 
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
2 edits |  They do allow opt-out like the others
Why am I here? EMBARQ has enabled a service to redirect web address errors to a helpful search page. You entered an unknown name that EMBARQ used to present site suggestions that you may find useful. Clicking any of these suggestions provides you with Yahoo! search results, which may include relevant sponsored links. Can I opt out of this service? » search.embarq.com/prefs.phpIf this service is not right for you, please visit your Preferences page to opt out. At any point in time, you can opt back in to the service by visiting your Preferences page. 
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
| |
|  | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: They do allow opt-out like the others I agree... an 'opt-in' would be a better practice. This way DNS in general would work as expected for apps beyond browsers.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
1 edit | Re: They do allow opt-out like the others I dis-agree that people should opt-in, from a business point of view.
Honestly, I hate the idea and always have. DNS should simply fail. I think that all this redirecting going on will surely drive up the amount of domain sniping going on. There will be more of a reason for dead, garbage domains to be registered now more than ever.
Also, as for the opt-in/opt-out situation... the "average" user often times doesn't know to seek an opt-in. Power users CAN, and will, look for a way to opt out. When that page comes up, they should also put a tool on that very page that says "don't want our "advanced page" then click here to opt-out"... or the opt out should be on the very page they are serving. So, from a management point of view, opt-out make more sense. But, again, they simply shouldn't do this at all.
I'm just curious - with their systems going into place, if you don't find what you were looking for, will the default search engine still open rather than a redirect? I personally like the ugly "page not found" screen my browser gives me. I don't even default to google.com and especially don't default to "Microsoft Dead" either.. but how will this affect that function?
For many of the unsophisticated users on the internet, they think that google or msn IS the internet and they always start from there.
This is a long stretch, but, since these ISPs are getting revenue off of mis-typed domains, I, as a holder of hundreds of domain names, am "damaged" by this action of theirs. I have to pay X amount of money each year for every domain that I hold, yet, an ISP can get benefits from every mis-typed domain entered into the browser and not pay a dime. Since we're in the day and age of suing to get what we want, I'd almost believe there is a little something there..
I just think there is SOOO many things wrong with DNS redirection.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
| | | | 
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: They do allow opt-out like the others There's no way you could "opt out" of DNS redirection on a web page, unless it required Microsoft Internet Explorer and ActiveX and changed the DNS server specifications in your TCP/IP setup.
What they're offering as a so-called "opt out" is a choice of one redirect instead of another. It gives your browser a cookie specifying error message without ads, or automatically try a different URL. Users who choose one of these are still getting falsified DNS results. To get true results from DNS queries you would have to put the IPs of standards-compliant, untampered DNS servers in your TCP/IP settings.
The latter is what ISPs should be offering for users who want unmolested, real internet. | |
| | | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: They do allow opt-out like the others I will admit, I don't get involved in this kinda crap, because I believe it's crap.
But, the way they are doing the so-called opt out is to what, give you a different set up DNS servers that don't redirect? From what I gathered, you visited a page on the ISP, selected "don't redirect me" and it changed your account settings.
I know that it could be done based on a few things.. the account, the modem mac, or other criteria.. it just seems to be bad business.
Also, since search engines are not allowed to sell placement and ranking any more, it just seems that since this is "for profit" and it's calling up a search page, it would tend to cross that border depending on how it's being used. From what I've seen so far, it looks like Yahoo is a big player in this and, by all accounts, IS getting revenue from this service which should be in violation of the rules.
The one thing I also noticed missing from these pages were any clear message stating that "the page you were looking for was not found" message... it simply pulls up a page with some search options. To me, that's ANYTHING BUT what I'd expect. How am *I* supposed to know if the domain isn't valid or is someone simply sniped the domain from the person I intended to find.
IMHO, it's only a matter of time before some consumer group (hint hint) takes this one to court.
Being that this site is a 'consumer' site, I'm surprised they haven't started raising funds from it's vast user base and gone head to head with some of these issues where it counts in addition to the vast online bitch fest. Seems to me that there is an opportunity here that BBR is missing if they truly want to make a difference.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
| | | | | |
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: They do allow opt-out like the others I was mistaken, I forgot that most subscribers use the setting to "automatically get DNS server IPs" or whatever it's called in each particular router. In that case the ISP could look at who it is (based on MAC or whatever) and assign them a different DNS server and it could be a good one.
For those of us who specify IPs, a web page opt-out wouldn't work. | |
| | | | | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: They do allow opt-out like the others why wouldn't it?? Doesn't the user go to a web page to opt out?
»/r0/download/1···barq.jpg
It appears that in this example, you visit a website, change your setting, and that should do it.
What I was getting at is the very page you are redirected to should have the ability for the customer to either 1) opt out there. or 2) click to log into the page that you make the change. At minimum, they should tell you that the page wasn't found, they are 'trying to help you' (right) and that you CAN opt out of these pages.. ie: "Don't want to use this help? Click here for more info on how to opt out" ... or something like that
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
| | | | | | | |
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: They do allow opt-out like the others said by swhx7  : [web page opt-out could work for those who set "automatically get DNS addresses" but] For those of us who specify IPs, a web page opt-out wouldn't work.
said by fiberguy :why wouldn't it??
A web page can't change your TCP/IP settings (maybe excepting some Active-X badware, if you allow it) or anything in your router (apart from some criminal hacking techniques). And this is a good thing; a browser shouldn't have access to system settings. If your device is configured to send DNS requests to xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:53, there's no way the ISP could re-configure it to send them to yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy:53 instead.
On the other hand if it's configured to send the DNS requests to a generic address where they will be passed on to a DNS server the ISP's device selects (that's the "automatically select" option in OS or router settings), a web request could tell the ISP to put your MAC on a list of those which get their DNS requests sent to the un-borked nameserver instead of the borked one.
said by fiberguy :What I was getting at is the very page you are redirected to should have the ability for the customer to either 1) opt out there. or 2) click to log into the page that you make the change [or get] more info on how to opt out
Yes, that would be the least they could do. They probably don't because more people would opt out. Making it something you have to hunt for on their website maximizes the ad audience. | |
| | | | | | | | | dagman52
join:2007-11-12
32879
| Re: They do allow opt-out like the others It has to be doing it based on mac-address without re-assigning anything. I get opted out at the DNS server almost instantly. Doing nslookup in a shell loop directly against the server the answer changes real-time as I opt-in/opt-out of the service. This behavior is very different than my previous Charter experience, which there was no freakin way to shut off. | |
| | | | | | 
anonposter
@insightbb.com
| I will further this argument by asking what right does an ISP have to co-opt my subdomains? Say I own billsbigcars.com, I choose not to use wildcards on the nameservers for that domain for some technical reason, and one of my potential customers tries to go to toyottas.billsbigcars.com, with an obvious misspelling of toyotas. The user (at least on Insight ... I am sure others) will STILL be redirected to the ISP search page, even though billsbigcars.com exists. What's worse, they may immediately see an ad for bobsbigcars.com, a fierce competitor, click on their site, and buy a car ... leaving me holding the bag while Insight makes money off of the ad.
This practice reminds me of the old story of the competing tow truck companies (or similar service) ... COMPANY A fooled the phone company into setting up remote access call forwarding FOR COMPANY B... and often during rush hour would forward COMPANY B's calls to COMPANY A's phone number. This was outright fraud ... and to me the redirect situation described above is exactly the same thing! | |
| | | | | 
bleearg13
join:2001-03-03
Gaithersburg, MD
| When you opt-out, all it does is pass your DNS requests through without any redirection. I've tested a device like this before. You don't need to modify DNS settings in order to be opted-out - it's all done with access lists within the device. Here's how the device I tested works:
1. DNS request is made from client.
2. DNS request is sent to the DNS server.
3. Transparent DNS proxy sits *on the wire* between the network and DNS server(s) or load balancer(s).
4. If a requesting (client) IP is in the 'redirect' list, then the request gets sent to an external DNS server (off-net from your DNS server), with the source address of the device.
5. Replies come back to the device, which then get sent back to the client. This works much the same way as a web proxy.
6. If a client IP is not in the list, then the device simply passes the packet through the DNS server with no proxying or modification. If the power to the proxy device goes out, it will still pass traffic and just turns into a dumb device - no one is served proxy'd DNS - they all get real responses.
I'm not at liberty to say exactly what device it was, but it's my understanding that this company was behind the technology used in the Verisign SiteFinder fiasco several years ago. | |
| | 
rcdailey
Dragoonfly
Premium
join:2005-03-29
Rialto, CA | Maybe they just think that most people want to be offered alternative sites when they mistype a URL. Where's the fun in getting the standard 404 message anyway? | |
| |
floridaguy
@comcast.net | nslookup actually returns a NXDOMAIN when I opt out. It appears to not use cookies. Opt-out by default would be better, but doesn't seem like a big deal. | |
| | 
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | 4.2.2.2
4.2.2.3
4.2.2.4
4.2.2.5
4.2.2.6
4.2.2.7
Problem solved. | |
| | |
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia | Re: They do allow opt-out like the others Those are Level 3 servers and they're not officially approved for use by random individuals. Level 3 could decide to restrict access at any time.
ISPs should be providing standard DNS servers even if customers have to ask for them. | |
| | | | 
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
 ·Speakeasy
| Re: They do allow opt-out like the others said by swhx7 :Those are Level 3 servers and they're not officially approved for use by random individuals. Level 3 could decide to restrict access at any time. ISPs should be providing standard DNS servers even if customers have to ask for them. Or, Level3 could ACL them such that, if you're coming from outside their approved customer list, you get sent to a redirection service...
--
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell | |
| | | |
factchecker
@cox.net | The 4.2.2.x DNS servers have been operated since before Level3 (anyone remember BBN?) as a public service. There are no restrictions on their use and, in actuality, the more people that use them, the better because their cache data improves. | |
| | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ | But there would be no money in it if it were opt-in. | |
| | |
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: industry strategy on DNS redirection: strength in numbers said by morbo :it's clear that industry now believes that since everyone is doing it, why not us? whereas sitefinder/Verisign was a pioneer in this greedy practice and was beaten back from it, now it either has gradually become more accepted by the public or the new strategy is that every isp should do it so it is viewed as normal. Verisign may now try again to implement it's redirection since everyone else is doing it.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
| |
| | | lordofwhee
join:2007-10-21
Everett, WA
| Re: industry strategy on DNS redirection: strength in numbers said by GOLFnSUN :said by morbo :it's clear that industry now believes that since everyone is doing it, why not us? whereas sitefinder/Verisign was a pioneer in this greedy practice and was beaten back from it, now it either has gradually become more accepted by the public or the new strategy is that every isp should do it so it is viewed as normal. Verisign may now try again to implement it's redirection since everyone else is doing it. Of course, they aren't one to pass up a source of revenue for long, no matter what the public thinks. | |
| | | 
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| I wouldn't be so sure about that. It's one thing for RESIDENTIAL customers to be accepting of this service. It's quite another if business class customers do this.
Notice that Yahoo! is the company supporting most of these services. If Verisign started doing this crap, then that'll be an unfair competition against them. Yahoo! is depending on Verisign to provide a valid "nxdomain" reply in order for this service to work. If they never get one, then Yahoo! will be be out of business.
As an example, it's one thing for Apple to say they only accept electronic payments to buy an iPhone....but it'll be quite another for the government to say you can only use electronic payments to buy and iPhone.
Verisign is the "government" of .com and .net.
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: | |
| | 
snipper_cr
join:2002-01-22
Wheaton, IL
clubs: | Was this the thing that happened a few years back where Verisgn did the same thing and if users typed in bad URLs and verisign brought up a page, they technically had to "register" that domain? | |
| | | 
banditws6
Shrinking Time and Distance
join:2001-08-18
Naples, FL
·Comcast
| Re: Is this really that big of a Deal? This fundamentally disrupts one of the ways the 'net is supposed to work. To a user sitting in front of a browser, it's not a big deal...they can see that their miskeyed URL or nonexistent DNS query has forwarded to a search portal. But some web apps, services and tools will no longer be able to tell the true result of a DNS query. Every connection attempt will come back "successful" because it is being forwarded to a search portal.
For example, a spam filter might check the domain of an incoming email to see whether it exists or not, as many spams come from falsified domains. Those checks would no longer return accurate results -- every query would return true.
--
"I'll follow the law until it's just stupid." -Ted Nugent | |
| | | | |
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| said by kfsutops :Really, Who cares? I don't see what the big deal is. Is it installing some software on my computer? No. Big F-ing Deal. I really don't get what the big deal is. Congratulations: you are now ready for a management position at a telco! 
--
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell | |
| 
Ikyuao
Pro. debian Linux
join:2007-02-26
Wichita, KS | OpenDNS have offer more features already If cox communication starts like this as DNS redirection feature but what about porn sites? phishing sites? scammer sites? that most cable ISP offer little protection feature so nothing, OpenDNS offers more security features I need. | |
| | 
MLou
Premium
join:2007-05-01
Madison, WI
| Re: OpenDNS have offer more features already I tried OpenDns today. It wouldn't let me block yahoo.com. I canceled my account immediately.
I called Charter today to have the tech walk me through "opting out without leaving a cookie on my computer". He said it could not be done.
I asked him to walk me through changing my HOSTs file so the normal 404 page comes up instead of Charters ad search page. He said it can't be done.
I told him I do not want Charter's Yahoo ad and search page to come up when I mistype a url-I want the 404 page. He said it can't be done.
He also swore that Yahoo is not part of their service. That Charter does not use Yahoo search. I told him I'm looking at the page and it has at the top of the page "SEARCH POWERED BY YAHOO". When you try to opt out (with cookie!), it has the option to keep the YAHOO search. He swore it was not true and then said I had spyware.
I just ran both a virus and spyware scan this morning before calling tech, no spyware or virus. I told him this. He insisted that it's spyware causing the charter/Yahoo search page to come up instead of the 404. I pointed out that the web address it shows is »www11.charter.net/search?qo=www.···k0wQwiVg. He still insists it's spyware. That if I run another scan, it will show the 404 page. I made him swear on it. Did another scan, still get the Charter/Yahoo page.
I just want my 404 page back and to block Yahoo.com. | |
| | | | | | 
Jmartz
join:2000-07-20
Tenafly, NJ
| said by MLou :I tried OpenDns today. It wouldn't let me block yahoo.com. I canceled my account immediately. The blocking on OpenDNS does not take place immediately. I've had to wait upwards of 20 minutes before "blocked" domains actually get blocked. But Yahoo.com can be blocked on OpenDNS. You just have to make sure you set yourself up correctly. I have hundreds of domains blocked. Every time I go to a website that is infested with ads, I go into the HTML and get the URL's of the domains and block them. Then, when I return to said site, the ads are gone! But again, it usually takes 10 - 20 minutes before the sites get blocked. | |
| 
paulhaskew
Unoffical Dominos Spokesman
join:2002-01-10
Vancouver, WA
clubs: | bah! redirection blows, we all know it... private DNS servers FTW! | |
| |
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Re: bah! said by paulhaskew :redirection blows, we all know it... private DNS servers FTW! And, if a sufficient enough people start running them to impact their revenue stream, you can expect that they'll start doing port redirects such that it won't matter...
--
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell | |
| 
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs: | copying opendns? are most of the ISP's doing this just about copying OpenDNS's examples?
Seems like if OpenDNS can make it work, why not?
does that make sense? | |
| |
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: copying opendns? It does make sense, but OpenDNS is opt-in. What people seem to have a problem with is ISP's doing this without proper notice being given. I mean, not even an email or insert into a bill.
Personally, I don't care. I rolled my own DNS server. Until my ISP forces port 53 redirects, I don't care. After I had a chance to look at the bigger picture of things, it seems like a pretty neat revenue model.
Kinda like gas stations getting a kick back from every map sold to a wayward traveller. They only benefit from maps sold...and maps only get sold to those that are lost.
Don't get lost, don't buy a map 
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: | |
| | mikenolan7
Premium
join:2005-06-07
Torrance, CA | Redirects Does this mean that if I type well, I will eventually get charged for not making enough typos? | |
| | | |
|
|
Embarq, RCN Also Using DNS Redirection
