ICANN Threatens Verisign Verisign agrees to back down; for now Tipped by Karl Bode 
The web's key oversight authority today threatened legal action against Verisign for its new SiteFinder initiative, Verisign in turn agreeing to suspend the service, for now. - Verisign's decision to implement wildcard domain records (in essence redirecting wayward surfers to their new ad-backed website if they mis-type addresses or hit an unregistered domain) has given them no shortage of enemies web-wide. Some ISP's have implemented workarounds to thwart the attempt, and several lawsuits have been filed against the company; plaintiffs accusing them of abusing their position as the web's primary domain manager for financial gain. Through it all Verisign primarily shuffled their feet and grumbled, saying they'd send the idea to Committee to further explore any potential problems the change would call, something the majority of critics argue was too little, too late. The decision quickly caused numerous problems web-wide, from malfunctioning printers to troubles with anti-spam technology. Verisign acquired their powerful position after acquiring Network Solutions, and ICANN's (The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) decision to keep Verisign in that position has been a topic for debate for years now. ICANN was polite in response to the changes at first, issuing an advisory that the shift "appears to have considerably weakened the stability of the Internet, introduced ambiguous and inaccurate responses in the (Domain Name System), and has caused an escalating chain reaction of measures and countermeasures that contribute to further instability."Verisign responded to ICANN with an optimistic letter, which suggested that shutting down the Sitefinder service would be "premature". "All indications are that users, important members of the internet community we all serve, are benefiting from the improved web navigation offered by Site Finder," the letter says. "These results are consistent with the findings from the extensive research we performed." If the internet could laugh, it likely let out a digital chuckle at Verisign's use of the word "benefit". Apparently ICANN's good humor has expired, and the organization today threatened legal action against Verisign if they refuse to reverse their course. ICANN has given the company until 9 p.m. EDT Saturday to back-pedal on their decision, after which it will "seek promptly to enforce VeriSign's contractual obligations". Update: Verisign has apparently agreed to back down and suspend the service for now, a company spokesman saying "We will accede to the request while we explore all of our options."
|
 mobModerhatedPremium join:2000-10-07 | Good!
F*** Verisign. | |
|  |  Stewy85Premium join:2003-01-16 Sharon, WI | Re: Good! i agree. | |
|  |  OmegaDisplaced OhioanPremium join:2002-07-30 Cheyenne, WY | I agree also.
It has not really affected me, I mis-typed just to see what would happen, but reading about all the problems it caused - i hope they get legal action. | |
|  |  PJ DPull My FingerPremium join:2002-10-19 Washington | said by mob: F*** Verisign.
Couldn't have said it better myself.....but let me try: F*** Verisign. -- wolfhaven.org | |
|
 Augustus IIIIf Only Rome Could See Us Now.... join:2001-01-25 Gainesville, GA | yay this issue, affected me only 2 times, from all the times i've mistyped an URL. glad to see their wings getting clipped though. | |
|  | | Can someone explain... I understand that Verislime is the keeper of .com and .net, but when I register a .com, some of the money I pay must go somewhere other than my registrar and Verisign, correct? I'm assuming there's some common organization that gets a cut of all domain name registrations.
If that's true, then it seems that Verislime would owe payment for every unregistered web address it directed to it's server. | |
|  |  kapilThe Kapil join:2000-04-26 Chicago, IL | Re: Can someone explain... All registrars pay the registry operator (Versign for com and net) a "wholesale" rate for domain registrations. Verisign calls it the registry fee. The last I checked, this fee was $6. Anything above this registry fee goes to your registrar.
Versign doesn't owe anything to anyone because no names were "registered". It operates the registry and controls the root DNS servers for the .com and .net TLDs.
Versign is contractually forbidden from being an registrar...but it gets around this by using different subsidiaries for the wholesale and retail registration business. -- ::: Do, or do not, there is no try:::»www.kapilville.com | |
|  |  |  | | Re: Can someone explain... Exactly! No names were registered but the root DNS is responding to all these new names. Someone should have to pay for each of these. When I register a name, I get a root DNS entry for my money. What Verisign has done is the equivalent of giving themselves a root DNS entry for every unregistered .com and .net name.
Of course, if the 6 bucks goes entirely to Verisign, it wouldn't matter if they were made to pay for each of those names. On the other hand, if a buck or two went to ICANN, that could add up fast.
Then there's the anti-trust issues. The only way another company can do the equivalent of what Verisign is doing would be to register every possible .com or .net name. Obviously, Verisign has an unfair advantage.
ICANN should force all registry operators to chip in a buck or two for every domain that their root DNS server responds to. That would stop this nonsense. | |
|  |  |  |  davePremium,MVM join:2000-05-04 not in ohio kudos:7 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Can someone explain... said by Kev9923: What Verisign has done is the equivalent of giving themselves a root DNS entry for every unregistered .com and .net name.
No it isn't.
Today, ijustmadethisnameup.com goes to Verisign.
I can register ijustmadethisnameup.com for myself.
By your theory, if Verisign had to pay for ijustmadethisnameup.com, either (a) I wouldn't be able to register it - since registration is a one-owner-only thing, or (b) they'd be entitled to a refund?
Sure, what they did was reprehensible. But let's not confuse the issue. | |
|
 DaveDudeNo Fear join:1999-09-01 New Jersey kudos:1 | i will have to update the firewalls and the hostfiles!! | |
|  jose3030Premium join:1999-08-17 Manassas, VA | ICANN dont play
Homey dont play that *BLAM oVER THE HEAD* | |
| 
| Down with big Business! Verisign is a greedy American Corporation...
They have demonstrated to us here that they are not capable of handling this responsibility, and thus this power should be revoked!
DOWN WITH VERISLIME!
Take them down ICANN!!!!!! [text was edited by author 2003-10-03 14:46:09] | |
|  |  kapilThe Kapil join:2000-04-26 Chicago, IL | Re: Down with big Business! ICANN itself is hardly a role model for ethical business practices. -- ::: Do, or do not, there is no try:::»www.kapilville.com | |
|  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Down with big Business! said by kapil: ICANN itself is hardly a role model for ethical business practices.
I agree... this fight is gonna be just like KaZaA vs. the RIAA. Both are slime. -- The tobacco industry is more respectable than the telemarketing industry. | |
|
 bkymoof moofPremium join:2002-07-05 Austin, TX | GG ICANN I love you ICANN  | |
|  | | Good For Them I am glad to see Verisign bieng taken to task over this quickly. -- ~Age and Treachery will always overcome Youth and Skill.~ | |
|  |  | | ICANN ICANN't just became I WILL. | |
|  |  technickPremium join:2000-12-16 Wheat Ridge, CO kudos:1 | Re: ICANN lol, reminds me of once upon a time in mexico city.
"Are you a mexican.. or a MexiCAN'T!?!?" -- AMD 2500, 1024 MEG PC 3200, 180 GIG HDD, MSI KT4 Ultra Board, MSI GEFORCE 4 TI 4600 | |
|
 |  mondobytePolitically IncorrectPremium join:2000-05-12 Fort Myers, FL | Just more unethical behavior from Verisign Lately I have received quite a few notices from Verisign even though my registrar is GoDADDY.
The Verislime folks keep sending these "urgent" notices that my registrations are about to expire and I could loose my domain names and offering to renew them at a hugely bloated $$ amount. (the permission to innitiate a transfer to Verislime is in very small print at the bottom)
On further review I find the soonest the domains will expire is 1 year and some as long as 3 years and there is no big hurry ... certainly no reason to panic!!!!
I hate ilk like this the purport to be respectable. These are just Mafioso or Drug Dealers who have invested in legitimate business to become respectable but their actions betray their true nature!
Hurray for ICANN ... I hope Verisign gets the boot -- Security through obscurity is no security at all | |
|  |  |
 | | Get real! "VeriSign's SiteFinder service has been used more than 40 million times by Internet users in just over two weeks, Galvin said."
Oh really? I don't think it is fair to say it was "USED" whne you forced people that way! | |
|  |  DannyZGentoo FanboyPremium join:2003-01-29 | Re: Get real! And forced to agree to their TOS too! | |
|  |  tjunkerPremium join:2002-03-29 Houston, TX | Surfers were forced to SiteFinder but no one who ended up there was forced to "use" the site. No doubt many clueless people did, but if there really were 40 million visits redirected by DNS to SiteFinder, it would be interesting to know how many of those 40 million resulted in any clicks on anything on the SiteFinder page. Very few, I suspect.
One has to think that many of the alleged 40 million visits were generated by annoyed Internet users exploring the weird phenomenon of surfing to invalid URLs in .COM and .NET and getting a sneaky Website instead of an error. | |
|
 | | Let's Drum them out
THese people can be replaced- very quickly. So let's cut the buttons of their jackets, break their digital sabers, and boot their *sses out the gate | |
|  SmokeyI'd rather be skiingPremium join:2003-05-20 Wild West Reviews:
·Verizon Wireless..
| ALL OVER!! Reuters UPDATE - VeriSign to halt new service as demanded Friday October 3, 3:38 pm ET By Elinor Mills Abreu
(Updates with ICANN comment, more background, VeriSign stock price) SAN FRANCISCO, Oct 3 (Reuters) - Web address provider VeriSign Inc. (NasdaqNM:VRSN - News) on Friday agreed to suspend a controversial new service that steers mistaken Web searches to its own page, acceding to a demand by the body that oversees Internet policy.
Earlier on Friday, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers issued a statement insisting that VeriSign halt its SiteFinder service and restore the ".com" and ".net" Web domains to the way they were before Sept. 15, when VeriSign began the service.
ICANN gave VeriSign until 6 p.m. PDT (0100 GMT) to comply with the request or face sanctions for violating its contract with ICANN.
"We will accede to the request while we explore all of our options," VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin told Reuters.
ICANN spokeswoman Mary Hewitt declined to comment on Galvin's statement until she hears it from the company or sees it in writing.
VeriSign has defended its move, saying it was providing a convenience to Internet users who previously received an error message. The SiteFinder service directs searches for Web addresses that have been mistyped or not registered to a page that includes pay-for-placement topic links.
But Internet users, network administrators and rivals have cried foul, claiming VeriSign overstepped its authority.
"There have been widespread expressions of concern about the impact of these changes on the security and stability of the Internet," ICANN said in its statement.
SiteFinder is rendering spam filters ineffective, adversely affecting other automated Web tools and services, creating a single point of failure "that is likely to be attractive to deliberate attacks" and raising serious privacy issues, according to ICANN.
VeriSign's activation of SiteFinder is "not consistent" with its contract to serve as the main database keeper of all addresses in the ".com" and ".net" domains, ICANN added.
With the service, VeriSign is violating the contract's code of conduct and equal access obligations and failing to act as a neutral registry service provider, among other things, ICANN said.
Galvin said ICANN was using "anecdotal and isolated issues to attempt to regulate non-registry services, but in the interests of further working with the technical community, we will temporarily suspend SiteFinder."
Thwarting efforts such as providing new services will hinder innovation on the Internet, he added.
VeriSign's service has spawned at least three lawsuits against the Mountain View, California-based company.
ICANN previously asked VeriSign to suspend the service, but VeriSign instead said it would form an advisory panel.
VeriSign is not the first registry to test or implement a so-called "redirect" service. But its service impacts the majority of Web searches, as opposed to addresses ending in other domains, such as .biz.
VeriSign's SiteFinder service has been used more than 40 million times by Internet users in just over two weeks, Galvin said.
VeriSign shares were trading at $13.93, up 2 percent, on the Nasdaq -- "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."-Edmund Burke"The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."-Albert Einstein | |
|  Rejected OneI Suffer From Id10t ErrorsPremium join:2003-07-31 Wilmington, DE | im still getting verisign
im still getting the redirect here | |
|  |  | | Re: im still getting verisign said by Rejected One: im still getting the redirect here
Me Too -- If everything is under control your not going fast enough!! | |
|  |  davePremium,MVM join:2000-05-04 not in ohio kudos:7 | Since the deadline given by ICANN is 6pm PDT on Saturday 4th October, 2003, and since Verizon asked for (and did not get) an increased deadline, you might guess that 24 hours before the deadline, the change back will not have happened. | |
|
 shuubzA Good Kind Of Pain join:2001-02-12 Dexter, MI | How long will this take?
I can "agree" to fly to the moon by flapping my arms.
I can delay the attempt indefinitely.
How long will they take to actually do what they agreed to do? Verisign has been a bad player for years. You don't get much sleazier than them.
I can say this: my company will need digital certificates in the next 6 months or so.
I GUARANTEE we won't be getting them from Verisign or Thawte.
Why would I trust a corp that broke the public's trust? Why would our customers trust the security provided by Verisign digital certs? | |
|  |  See 8 replies to this post | |
 damonlabPremium join:2001-05-02 Detroit, MI | it will take several hours If it is anything like registering a domain, it will take several hours before sitefinder gets knocked offline worldwide... besides, they have until tomorrow night to comply. | |
|  eliasPremium,VIP join:2000-07-24 Miami, FL | Taking Too Long It's still up...
-- Elias | |
|  |  See 6 replies to this post |
 | |
|
|