6 ms·

Network Solutions’ scammy bullshit signup funnel

77 points by StuntPope 7y ago

LinuxBender 7y ago
I've been watching NetSol devolve in this direction. It started when they were acquired by web.com. They have really gone downhill. I had to teach their escalation support how to use "dig" against external / authoritative servers. That said, I have found they are still better than most of the registrars that have popped up since. Some of the registrars can't even handle apex names as NS records. The scammy upselling appears to be a trend and isn't limited to registrars. Comcast did that to me as well with their bandwidth plans.
- crikli 7y ago
  NetSol were scammy long before the web.com purchase. Back in 2007/2008 they were "front-running" meaning that if you searched for a domain name and didn't buy immediately, those dickheads would buy the domain and then demand a much higher price to sell it to you. Then when they got called out for it they tried to act all "oh, this is for YOUR benefit."[1] And they blatantly lied about the details of what they were doing. [1] https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/01/network-solutions-defends-frontrunningto-stop-frontrunners/ https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/01/network-soluti...
  - Spare_account 7y ago
    Your source doesn't support your assertion. > He acknowledged that the company does, indeed, put a hold on the domain name after a search is performed and reserves it for four days, but that if a customer searches for the same domain within that time at networksolutions.com, it will be available to register. After the four days is up, the domain is released.
    - inetknght 7y ago
      That sounds like it supports @crikli's assertion.
    - crikli 7y ago
      I'm the source because I experienced this firsthand in 2007. I found the article because I needed to validate an almost 12 year old memory. :) As for the quote you picked out, it's a partial truth. The partial truth is that sure, the domain was "available to register"...at a multiple of the standard price. I don't remember what the multiple was. And if you wanted to purchase through another registrar you couldn't because NetSol held the domain. This all resulted in a class action lawsuit: https://techcrunch.com/2008/02/25/network-solutions-icann-sued-over-domain-front-running/ https://techcrunch.com/2008/02/25/network-solutions-icann-su... That was settled a year later: https://domainnamewire.com/2009/04/29/network-solutions-settles-class-action-from-frontrunning-practice/ https://domainnamewire.com/2009/04/29/network-solutions-sett... Edit: I removed where I said the part about the domain being released after four days was a lie. I remember it being much much longer but at the same time, I don't remember all the details well enough to make a statement of that potency.
    - asclepi 7y ago
      There was no net transfer of money from NetSol to the registry for those domains, except when a customer would accept the offer for the domain. They registered the name, and just before the 5-day ICANN Add Grace Period would end, they reversed the registration and received full credit for the registration fee. At that time the domain would immediately become available for registration again through any registrar with no grace/redemption/deletion periods.
- jlv2 7y ago
  My experience with NetSol was they were bad to begin with when they were given a monopoly to charge for DNS registrations in 1995.
  - asclepi 7y ago
    NetSol was the only bidder when the government solicited for a registrar to manage registrations for the domain name registry, and was again the sole bidder when the government privatized the registry itself two years later.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
bill_mcgonigle 7y ago
Mark may be bombastic, but he's not usually wrong. It's hard to believe they actually did the pre-auth - anybody here at PayPal reading this?
- nyx_ 7y ago
  Right? It's blowing my mind that it's possible to pre-approve PayPal payments without knowing how much you're going to be billed. The system should not allow users to hand a blank check to a retailer.
ikeboy 7y ago
>Netsol charges $35 for a 1-year .com renewal! (It’s $15 here). And $8 at cloudflare.
- mfatica 7y ago
  Just to note however that they only do renewals and transfers, no new registrations
spartas 7y ago
The prices aren't listed in the dropdowns, but if you choose an option, then the price should be displayed on the right: < https://imgur.com/a/1hSJOUq https://imgur.com/a/1hSJOUq >
- StuntPope 7y ago
  Added an update to post to acknowledge this.
- droithomme 7y ago
  So, "FREE" == $2640.90 (eyes bulge out like the guy in a warner bros cartoon)
inetknght 7y ago
I've been an American consumer all of my life. Everything in here is business as usual for American consumers (and this comment is clearly hyperbole). Thank you for pointing it all out though. In seriousness though; I sure wish these practices were illegal.
- chmod775 7y ago
  Most of that stuff is horribly illegal in the EU. Explicitly even. Plus if you took them to court after getting a surprise-bill, I'd imagine even a US court siding with you. This is just fraudulent.
hitpointdrew 7y ago
Man, I have only heard horror stories about Network Solutions. When I started out I was using 1&1, turned out they weren't that great either so switched to hover.com and have been very happy there. Not sure if it is true but I have heard people say they check if a domain is available on Network Solutions, then check the next day and suddenly it is more expensive, very shady if true.
- mey 7y ago
  I have been very happy with hover.com as well
dammitfoo 7y ago
Kinda off topic.. but does anybody here have any experience with the registrar dynadot? I have a few domains with them since last year and it's been uneventful. But I was just wondering if anybody else had any good/bad stories about them?
Fnoord 7y ago
Is this kind of behavior legal in the EU?
Canada 7y ago
Remember when they put a wildcard in the gLTDs? Assholes.
- asclepi 7y ago
  This was Verisign, which acquired Network Solutions in 2000. Verisign had already spun off the registry unit from Network Solutions when this incident happened. The remaining registrar business of Network Solutions, along with the name, was sold less than a month later. As of today, the registry unit is still part of Verisign, while Network Solutions changed hands many more times.
  - Canada 7y ago
    You're right, it was in 2003.
mike503 7y ago
NetSol is a plague. Web.com was garbage and bought them to consolidate even more garbage in house. They don’t even encrypt customers passwords. I was asked to confirm a plaintext password once on behalf of a client. No identity confirmation required! Typically I login and simply want to change nameservers for clients and I’m prompted to buy services while I navigate through their convoluted portal for a simple change. It’s almost amusing how pathetic it is.
droithomme 7y ago
What you document solidly here are definitely deceptive practices. The adding on of services and labeling them "FREE" when they will result in ongoing recurring charges is highly deceptive.

77 points by StuntPope 7y ago

I've been watching NetSol devolve in this direction. It started when they were acquired by web.com. They have really gone downhill. I had to teach their escalation support how to use "dig" against external / authoritative servers. That said, I have found they are still better than most of the registrars that have popped up since. Some of the registrars can't even handle apex names as NS records. The scammy upselling appears to be a trend and isn't limited to registrars. Comcast did that to me as well with their bandwidth plans.

crikli 7y ago
NetSol were scammy long before the web.com purchase. Back in 2007/2008 they were "front-running" meaning that if you searched for a domain name and didn't buy immediately, those dickheads would buy the domain and then demand a much higher price to sell it to you. Then when they got called out for it they tried to act all "oh, this is for YOUR benefit."[1] And they blatantly lied about the details of what they were doing. [1] https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/01/network-solutions-defends-frontrunningto-stop-frontrunners/ https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/01/network-soluti...
- Spare_account 7y ago
  Your source doesn't support your assertion. > He acknowledged that the company does, indeed, put a hold on the domain name after a search is performed and reserves it for four days, but that if a customer searches for the same domain within that time at networksolutions.com, it will be available to register. After the four days is up, the domain is released.
  - inetknght 7y ago
    That sounds like it supports @crikli's assertion.
  - crikli 7y ago
    I'm the source because I experienced this firsthand in 2007. I found the article because I needed to validate an almost 12 year old memory. :) As for the quote you picked out, it's a partial truth. The partial truth is that sure, the domain was "available to register"...at a multiple of the standard price. I don't remember what the multiple was. And if you wanted to purchase through another registrar you couldn't because NetSol held the domain. This all resulted in a class action lawsuit: https://techcrunch.com/2008/02/25/network-solutions-icann-sued-over-domain-front-running/ https://techcrunch.com/2008/02/25/network-solutions-icann-su... That was settled a year later: https://domainnamewire.com/2009/04/29/network-solutions-settles-class-action-from-frontrunning-practice/ https://domainnamewire.com/2009/04/29/network-solutions-sett... Edit: I removed where I said the part about the domain being released after four days was a lie. I remember it being much much longer but at the same time, I don't remember all the details well enough to make a statement of that potency.
  - asclepi 7y ago
    There was no net transfer of money from NetSol to the registry for those domains, except when a customer would accept the offer for the domain. They registered the name, and just before the 5-day ICANN Add Grace Period would end, they reversed the registration and received full credit for the registration fee. At that time the domain would immediately become available for registration again through any registrar with no grace/redemption/deletion periods.
jlv2 7y ago
My experience with NetSol was they were bad to begin with when they were given a monopoly to charge for DNS registrations in 1995.
- asclepi 7y ago
  NetSol was the only bidder when the government solicited for a registrar to manage registrations for the domain name registry, and was again the sole bidder when the government privatized the registry itself two years later.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

bill_mcgonigle 7y ago

Mark may be bombastic, but he's not usually wrong. It's hard to believe they actually did the pre-auth - anybody here at PayPal reading this?

nyx_ 7y ago
Right? It's blowing my mind that it's possible to pre-approve PayPal payments without knowing how much you're going to be billed. The system should not allow users to hand a blank check to a retailer.

ikeboy 7y ago

>Netsol charges $35 for a 1-year .com renewal! (It’s $15 here). And $8 at cloudflare.

mfatica 7y ago
Just to note however that they only do renewals and transfers, no new registrations

spartas 7y ago

The prices aren't listed in the dropdowns, but if you choose an option, then the price should be displayed on the right: < https://imgur.com/a/1hSJOUq https://imgur.com/a/1hSJOUq >

StuntPope 7y ago
Added an update to post to acknowledge this.
droithomme 7y ago
So, "FREE" == $2640.90 (eyes bulge out like the guy in a warner bros cartoon)

inetknght 7y ago

I've been an American consumer all of my life. Everything in here is business as usual for American consumers (and this comment is clearly hyperbole). Thank you for pointing it all out though. In seriousness though; I sure wish these practices were illegal.

chmod775 7y ago
Most of that stuff is horribly illegal in the EU. Explicitly even. Plus if you took them to court after getting a surprise-bill, I'd imagine even a US court siding with you. This is just fraudulent.

hitpointdrew 7y ago

Man, I have only heard horror stories about Network Solutions. When I started out I was using 1&1, turned out they weren't that great either so switched to hover.com and have been very happy there. Not sure if it is true but I have heard people say they check if a domain is available on Network Solutions, then check the next day and suddenly it is more expensive, very shady if true.

mey 7y ago
I have been very happy with hover.com as well

dammitfoo 7y ago

Kinda off topic.. but does anybody here have any experience with the registrar dynadot? I have a few domains with them since last year and it's been uneventful. But I was just wondering if anybody else had any good/bad stories about them?

Fnoord 7y ago

Is this kind of behavior legal in the EU?

Canada 7y ago

Remember when they put a wildcard in the gLTDs? Assholes.

asclepi 7y ago
This was Verisign, which acquired Network Solutions in 2000. Verisign had already spun off the registry unit from Network Solutions when this incident happened. The remaining registrar business of Network Solutions, along with the name, was sold less than a month later. As of today, the registry unit is still part of Verisign, while Network Solutions changed hands many more times.
- Canada 7y ago
  You're right, it was in 2003.

mike503 7y ago

NetSol is a plague. Web.com was garbage and bought them to consolidate even more garbage in house. They don’t even encrypt customers passwords. I was asked to confirm a plaintext password once on behalf of a client. No identity confirmation required! Typically I login and simply want to change nameservers for clients and I’m prompted to buy services while I navigate through their convoluted portal for a simple change. It’s almost amusing how pathetic it is.

droithomme 7y ago

What you document solidly here are definitely deceptive practices. The adding on of services and labeling them "FREE" when they will result in ongoing recurring charges is highly deceptive.