5 ms·

U.S. Government Starts New Round of ‘Pirate’ Domain Seizures

83 points by Garbage 15y ago

steve19 15y ago
I am really ashamed that I once thought that this asset seizure thing was a good idea. Surly, I thought, only bad people like drug dealers would have their mansions confiscated. Shame on me.
- Joakal 15y ago
  Asset seizure is a good source of funds: http://detnews.com/article/20091112/METRO/911120388/Police-property-seizures-ensnare-even-the-innocent http://detnews.com/article/20091112/METRO/911120388/Police-p...
- chopsueyar 15y ago
  At least the drug dealers receive due process.
  - ataggart 15y ago
    Alleged drug dealers will get due process for drug charges. That is not quite the case for the seized assets since "proceedings are brought against the property itself, not the owner. Hence they often have odd case titles, such as U.S. v. Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Dollars or U.S. v. One 1987 Jeep Wrangler." [1] [1] http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/26/the-forfeiture-racket http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/26/the-forfeiture-racket
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
swaits 15y ago
Such sites should be moving away from US controlled domains. The writing is on the wall.
- dc2k08 15y ago
  One of the biggest and oldest swapped everything out to the Isle of Man TLD recently: .im
  - swaits 15y ago
    That's a start, but I'm not sure I'd trust the UK any more than the US.
eurohacker 15y ago
what are the domain names that American government cant steal - .com . net. org domains are regulated by the U.S. it seems, what about .me domains, .to , .in domains - i have heard that .me domain is also regulated from the US although it is a Montenegro domain
- chopsueyar 15y ago
  It comes down to which specific registrars will listen to the US government when Uncle Sam tells the registrar to point the TLD dns entries for the domain to ICE's dns server. I do not know what happens when multiple registrars update the TLDs with conflicting information? Is that allowed? Can ICANN intervene and force a TLD update, bypassing a registrar?
  - JoachimSchipper 15y ago
    ICANN can, in theory, "steal" any TLD. It would cause a humongous shitstorm, though, and I'm not sure that all root server operators would cooperate.
  - zbowling 15y ago
    with ICE, they go straight to Verisign with ICANN consent and take the domain at the root without involving the registers. The way it works is that registrars for .COM and .NET work with Verisign who runs on the root name servers for those TLDs. It used to be Internic which was operated by Network Solutions, which was bought by Verisign but then NS was later spun back off, but Verisign kept the root name servers. .ORG was given to another organization at some point to manage.
  - dedward 15y ago
    If it were notices sent to registrars, yes (talking .com, for instance). A US based registrar is bound by US law. A UK based registrar is not. In these cases they are going after the registry itself (Verisign) which is completely under US law and the individual registrars have no involvement whatsoever.
- tomjen3 15y ago
zbowling 15y ago
These seizures are probably illegal based on 4th amendment issues. No due process in the seizing. See this opinion: http://www.copyhype.com/2011/03/ice-seizures-criticism-magic-words/ http://www.copyhype.com/2011/03/ice-seizures-criticism-magic... Senators were calling for more information on their activity at the end of last year but I don't remember hearing much more on it. The interesting part is where international laws come into play. The issue really hasn't been resolved, but in the mean time, domains continue to be seized. And they have been making lots of mistakes like when they took a dynamic dns's server mooo.com and it's 84,000 subdomains for one account's alleged actions. See: http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/vulnerabilities/229218959?subSection=government http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/vulnerabilities... What they are doing is twisting an existing law on the books to apply to domains and playing cowboy off tips by the MPAA and RIAA. Domains getting taken away without notice or due process. It makes me sick.
- antihero 15y ago
  I guess it's more ammunition to slowly pump into people that are still ignorant enough to believe that the government has their best interests at heart.
Devilboy 15y ago
So why are they ignoring the big ones? Like for example ThePirateBay is a .org address which falls under US regulation?
- e40 15y ago
  They're testing the waters will little known sites. (I have never heard of the sites mentioned in the linked article.) My prediction: if there are no serious challenges to this, then the pace will pick up and they'll start going after higher profile sites, like TPB.
- bigwally 15y ago
  Simply because ThePirateBay uses a domain register that is not located in US. Most confiscated domains have registered with GoDaddy.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- antihero 15y ago
  I think TPB got temporarily shut down in Europe.
bruce511 15y ago
If nothing else the long term effect of this is simply to harden the internet infrastructure against govt. interference. It's sorta like saving electricity. We're mostly pretty inefficient so it's easy to make instant savings. For example switching from incandescent light bulbs, putting in geyser blankets, and so on, are all implemented easily, cheaply, and have an instant material effect. But it's a one time saving. It delays the inevitable, it bys time, but it doesn't solve the root problem. In the same way fiddling with root dns servers is easy, quick, and (temporarily) effective. It's a one-time solution though. If this carries on then people will simply work around the problem. We're already seeing alternative root dns servers, alternative top level (non-US) domains and so on. If the govt. want to waste their effectiveness on such mundane things as movies and music, then so be it. But every time they do it they just encourage more and more people to work around the problem. And the solution is likely to be (already is) more resistant to this form of explicit interference. The Internet is a genie not going back into the bottle. It is not something that can be controlled, censored, or governed in the traditional sense. As music and movie executives come to terms with what the digital part of 'Digital Revolution' really means, the govt is starting to learn what the real meaning of Revolution is. The times they are a changin' (again).
- Luyt 15y ago
  Circumventing government DNS seizures with alternative DNS root servers will only be a temporary stopgap. It's only a matter of time before the governments will mandate (by law) that every router should have a way to block certain IPs and MACs, and also offer a backdoor for government agencies to configure the router; hardware which cannot comply with this will be outlawed and illegal to operate. With that in place, government agencies can block any IP or MAC they want, without having to deal with DNS.
  - incomethax 15y ago
    In a world of virtualized services, blocking IP or MAC will also only get you so far. It's fairly easy to switch servers onto a different IP address, a different MAC address by simply using a different machine or configuration. DNS is the most vulnerable part of the stack simply because its the one thing in the stack that is centralized (loosely speaking).
gst 15y ago
The only "registry" today that is secure against such attacks is .bit. It uses a concept similar to Bitcoin, but instead of "mining" coins you get domain names. .bit is not available over the official root servers, to access .bit names you can: 1) Locally install a resolver for .bit 2) Use one of the nameservers on http://dot-bit.org/HowToBrowseBitDomains http://dot-bit.org/HowToBrowseBitDomains instead of your provider's nameserver 3) Use a domain that mirror's the .bit hierachy to resolve names, such as bitname.org The nice thing about .bit is that there is no central authority, but at the same time the ownership of names is clearly defined.
- eli 15y ago
  Boy am I tired of hearing about bitcoins. .bit is different from popular domain registries in that your users actually use it. Also, it's hardly a new idea. if you want to host a web site that can't be shut down, I'd go with a Tor hidden service: https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-hidden-service.html.en https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-hidden-service.html.en
  - gst 15y ago
    The new idea about .bit is that you have a decentralized system able to securely assign names to different participants. With existing systems the name is basically the hash of a public key which is not really that easy to remember or to use.
Arxiss 15y ago
O yea, lets bring down [random blog with tv shows that gets read by 10 ppl a day]. Who cares about 16 top sites... or TBP and WBB.

83 points by Garbage 15y ago

I am really ashamed that I once thought that this asset seizure thing was a good idea. Surly, I thought, only bad people like drug dealers would have their mansions confiscated. Shame on me.

Joakal 15y ago
Asset seizure is a good source of funds: http://detnews.com/article/20091112/METRO/911120388/Police-property-seizures-ensnare-even-the-innocent http://detnews.com/article/20091112/METRO/911120388/Police-p...
chopsueyar 15y ago
At least the drug dealers receive due process.
- ataggart 15y ago
  Alleged drug dealers will get due process for drug charges. That is not quite the case for the seized assets since "proceedings are brought against the property itself, not the owner. Hence they often have odd case titles, such as U.S. v. Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Dollars or U.S. v. One 1987 Jeep Wrangler." [1] [1] http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/26/the-forfeiture-racket http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/26/the-forfeiture-racket
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]

swaits 15y ago

Such sites should be moving away from US controlled domains. The writing is on the wall.

dc2k08 15y ago
One of the biggest and oldest swapped everything out to the Isle of Man TLD recently: .im
- swaits 15y ago
  That's a start, but I'm not sure I'd trust the UK any more than the US.

eurohacker 15y ago

what are the domain names that American government cant steal - .com . net. org domains are regulated by the U.S. it seems, what about .me domains, .to , .in domains - i have heard that .me domain is also regulated from the US although it is a Montenegro domain

chopsueyar 15y ago
It comes down to which specific registrars will listen to the US government when Uncle Sam tells the registrar to point the TLD dns entries for the domain to ICE's dns server. I do not know what happens when multiple registrars update the TLDs with conflicting information? Is that allowed? Can ICANN intervene and force a TLD update, bypassing a registrar?
- JoachimSchipper 15y ago
  ICANN can, in theory, "steal" any TLD. It would cause a humongous shitstorm, though, and I'm not sure that all root server operators would cooperate.
- zbowling 15y ago
  with ICE, they go straight to Verisign with ICANN consent and take the domain at the root without involving the registers. The way it works is that registrars for .COM and .NET work with Verisign who runs on the root name servers for those TLDs. It used to be Internic which was operated by Network Solutions, which was bought by Verisign but then NS was later spun back off, but Verisign kept the root name servers. .ORG was given to another organization at some point to manage.
- dedward 15y ago
  If it were notices sent to registrars, yes (talking .com, for instance). A US based registrar is bound by US law. A UK based registrar is not. In these cases they are going after the registry itself (Verisign) which is completely under US law and the individual registrars have no involvement whatsoever.
tomjen3 15y ago

zbowling 15y ago

These seizures are probably illegal based on 4th amendment issues. No due process in the seizing. See this opinion: http://www.copyhype.com/2011/03/ice-seizures-criticism-magic-words/ http://www.copyhype.com/2011/03/ice-seizures-criticism-magic... Senators were calling for more information on their activity at the end of last year but I don't remember hearing much more on it. The interesting part is where international laws come into play. The issue really hasn't been resolved, but in the mean time, domains continue to be seized. And they have been making lots of mistakes like when they took a dynamic dns's server mooo.com and it's 84,000 subdomains for one account's alleged actions. See: http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/vulnerabilities/229218959?subSection=government http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/vulnerabilities... What they are doing is twisting an existing law on the books to apply to domains and playing cowboy off tips by the MPAA and RIAA. Domains getting taken away without notice or due process. It makes me sick.

antihero 15y ago
I guess it's more ammunition to slowly pump into people that are still ignorant enough to believe that the government has their best interests at heart.

Devilboy 15y ago

So why are they ignoring the big ones? Like for example ThePirateBay is a .org address which falls under US regulation?

e40 15y ago
They're testing the waters will little known sites. (I have never heard of the sites mentioned in the linked article.) My prediction: if there are no serious challenges to this, then the pace will pick up and they'll start going after higher profile sites, like TPB.
bigwally 15y ago
Simply because ThePirateBay uses a domain register that is not located in US. Most confiscated domains have registered with GoDaddy.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
antihero 15y ago
I think TPB got temporarily shut down in Europe.

bruce511 15y ago

If nothing else the long term effect of this is simply to harden the internet infrastructure against govt. interference. It's sorta like saving electricity. We're mostly pretty inefficient so it's easy to make instant savings. For example switching from incandescent light bulbs, putting in geyser blankets, and so on, are all implemented easily, cheaply, and have an instant material effect. But it's a one time saving. It delays the inevitable, it bys time, but it doesn't solve the root problem. In the same way fiddling with root dns servers is easy, quick, and (temporarily) effective. It's a one-time solution though. If this carries on then people will simply work around the problem. We're already seeing alternative root dns servers, alternative top level (non-US) domains and so on. If the govt. want to waste their effectiveness on such mundane things as movies and music, then so be it. But every time they do it they just encourage more and more people to work around the problem. And the solution is likely to be (already is) more resistant to this form of explicit interference. The Internet is a genie not going back into the bottle. It is not something that can be controlled, censored, or governed in the traditional sense. As music and movie executives come to terms with what the digital part of 'Digital Revolution' really means, the govt is starting to learn what the real meaning of Revolution is. The times they are a changin' (again).

Luyt 15y ago
Circumventing government DNS seizures with alternative DNS root servers will only be a temporary stopgap. It's only a matter of time before the governments will mandate (by law) that every router should have a way to block certain IPs and MACs, and also offer a backdoor for government agencies to configure the router; hardware which cannot comply with this will be outlawed and illegal to operate. With that in place, government agencies can block any IP or MAC they want, without having to deal with DNS.
- incomethax 15y ago
  In a world of virtualized services, blocking IP or MAC will also only get you so far. It's fairly easy to switch servers onto a different IP address, a different MAC address by simply using a different machine or configuration. DNS is the most vulnerable part of the stack simply because its the one thing in the stack that is centralized (loosely speaking).

gst 15y ago

The only "registry" today that is secure against such attacks is .bit. It uses a concept similar to Bitcoin, but instead of "mining" coins you get domain names. .bit is not available over the official root servers, to access .bit names you can: 1) Locally install a resolver for .bit 2) Use one of the nameservers on http://dot-bit.org/HowToBrowseBitDomains http://dot-bit.org/HowToBrowseBitDomains instead of your provider's nameserver 3) Use a domain that mirror's the .bit hierachy to resolve names, such as bitname.org The nice thing about .bit is that there is no central authority, but at the same time the ownership of names is clearly defined.

eli 15y ago
Boy am I tired of hearing about bitcoins. .bit is different from popular domain registries in that your users actually use it. Also, it's hardly a new idea. if you want to host a web site that can't be shut down, I'd go with a Tor hidden service: https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-hidden-service.html.en https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-hidden-service.html.en
- gst 15y ago
  The new idea about .bit is that you have a decentralized system able to securely assign names to different participants. With existing systems the name is basically the hash of a public key which is not really that easy to remember or to use.

Arxiss 15y ago

O yea, lets bring down [random blog with tv shows that gets read by 10 ppl a day]. Who cares about 16 top sites... or TBP and WBB.