4 ms·
Yeah it's not very good writing, but the tl;dr is that someone executed a social engineering attack against Network Solutions, got them to update contact inform
by rjbwork 6y ago
Yeah it's not very good writing, but the tl;dr is that someone executed a social engineering attack against Network Solutions, got them to update contact information for the domain owner to themselves, transferred it to BizCN, then transferred it to Key Solutions, and then attempted to auction the domain name for $190k.
- omega3 6y agoIt reads like the author is basically guessing, in the lessons learned he mentions 2FA and in the same sentence he mentions that it might not have helped ultimately. He mentions it's a speculation, he'c not the injured party. Someone else did some "forensic work" yet the link doesn't work. I feel this should have been written by the domain owner or the registar. Couple of other issues: "It’s important to have one face (mouth?) to represent the diligent work everyone was doing." From the registar article: "the Perl team has yet to respond to our request for a comment"
- briandfoy 6y agoI don't know who The Register tried to contact, but it wasn't me. As soon as their article came out, however, I contacted the reporter. And, I've fixed the broken image. Thanks for noticing that.
- notyourday 6y ago> It reads like the author is basically guessing, in the lessons learned he mentions 2FA and in the same sentence he mentions that it might not have helped ultimately. If the attack was mounted via faked documents which is what I think the article implied then 2FA would not have helped as it was attack on a procedure of replacing contact info.