5 ms·

You're right, you don't deserve your information to be out there. However, Epik is a badly run registrar (as evident by the leaks), and the only reason any of

You're right, you don't deserve your information to be out there. However, Epik is a badly run registrar (as evident by the leaks), and the only reason any of us know about them is because they've worked so hard to attract unsavory customers. Registrars mostly offer the same service at the same price, and catering to unsavory clients is their only differentiating feature. It's their entire marketing scheme (take on customers that legitimate registrars won't), so it's not surprising that they're actually pretty illegitimate. I'm sorry your data was leaked, and I'd take this as a sign to move.

shiftpgdn 5y ago
How is that any different than a well lauded service like nearlyfreespeach.net? Just because you believe in the first amendment doesn't mean you should be the target of harassment.
- gkoberger 5y ago
  Every single registrar is targeted by hackers daily. I'm not convinced this is a sign of targeted harassment as much as just shoddy security practices.
  - Natsu 5y ago
    The hackers in this case released a statement giving their exact reasons for doing this, though, and it was hacked precisely because it hosts badspeech. So it's not a random hack, they did this specifically to give information out to activists. I wonder if the media outlets will continue with their policies of not reporting on hacked info or not?
    - gkoberger 5y ago
      No media outlet in the world has ever had a policy of not reporting on hacks. Sure, they won't show the data or how to get it yourself, but that's crazy to say that media outlets don't report on hacks.
      - Natsu 5y ago
        Many were advocating exactly that, though: https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/responsible-reporting-in-an-age-of-irresponsible-information/ https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/responsible-reporting-in... Then at least some places put into place policies like that, though some were then modified later: https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/16/twitter-changes-its-hacked-materials-policy-in-wake-of-new-york-post-controversy/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/16/twitter-changes-its-hacked...
        smoldesu 5y ago
        Twitter is not a "media outlet". That kind of mentality is the one that encouraged thousands to microwave their iPhone to charge it.
        Natsu 5y ago
        I agree that Twitter is not something generally trustworthy, but that ignores Twitter's role in breaking news. The many places that generally are called "media outlets" that have reported news with tweets as their primary sources to the point where I think you would have trouble finding a media outlet that is an exception.
- eigengrau5150 5y ago
  NFS.net probably wouldn't tolerate many of the clients that Epik takes pride in hosting, though they do take on some of that type to fund their MFFAM efforts. https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/about/faq?keywords=offensive&submit=Search+for+Keywords&form=1#BecauseFuckNazisThatsWhy https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/about/faq?keywords=offensiv... > What is the "MFFAM" policy? > Because we believe in free speech, we host a small amount of offensive content. Some days, that's really hard to do. There are views expressed using our service that we find personally repugnant. (Although we don't host as much of that type of content as one might expect, given our extremely broad Terms & Conditions of Service. The simple fact is that our service is for smart people, which disproportionately excludes people who hold those types of views.) > Nonetheless, our content policy does occasionally put us in a position of accepting money to host sites we find abhorrent. But we have no interest in profiting from sites like that. For that reason, since our founding in 2002, we have what we have more recently started calling the MFFAM policy: Morons Funding the Fight Against Morons. > When we find a repugnant site on our service, we mark the account. We receive reports about all payments to such accounts, and we take a portion of that money larger than the amount of estimated profit and we donate it to the best organization we can find. The best organization in any given case meets two criteria: > 1. The recipient organization does share our values. > 2. The recipient organization is as opposite (and hopefully as offensive) as possible to the site operator that funded the donation. > Examples of organizations that have received funding over the years include the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, local chapters of the NAACP, the National Bail Fund Network, the American Immigration Council, the Trevor Project, and others. > This policy isn't perfect by any means, but neither is the world we live in. MFFAM does let us help the organizations that we hope will eventually get us closer to that perfect world. It helps the people who operate repugnant sites understand that they are here because we tolerate them... barely... not because we endorse them or their views. It also does a pretty decent job of further thinning out the number of such sites, as a fair number of people who run them only believe in free speech when they're the ones talking.
- john-doe 5y ago
  https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/about/faq#BecauseFuckNazisThatsWhy https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/about/faq#BecauseFuckNazisT...
notadev 5y ago
I hadn’t heard any claims about unsavory customers until I was already a customer myself. I joined them because their Whois privacy was free while I had to pay for it on GoDaddy, nothing else.
- somehnguy 5y ago
  Namecheap offers it for free as well if you’re looking for a place to move. I use namecheap as my registrar and cloudflare for dns. Though the free namecheap dns worked completely fine for the years I used it too.
  - notadev 5y ago
    Thanks, it looks like I’m going this route. It’s a bit pricey to transfer all domains at once so I have to pick and choose. For anyone else in the same boat, they offer a promo code “TLD21TS8” which reduces the transfer costs by 64%.
lrae 5y ago
> and the only reason any of us know about them is because they've worked so hard to attract unsavory customers No. Epik is (also) known for providing good prices for (medium sized) domain owners (and everybody else who just wanted to transfer their domains for a fair price.): https://www.namepros.com/threads/epik-com-promo-deals-and-happy-hour-mega-thread.1148974/ https://www.namepros.com/threads/epik-com-promo-deals-and-ha...
- tzs 5y ago
  That linked forum discussion does not exactly make Epik look good. The first post from someone not employed by Epik is someone from Nigeria asking if they can buy a .US domain. An Epik staff member tells them that .US are restricted to those with US contact information (which is almost correct--you need to be a US citizen, resident, organization, or a foreign entity with a bona fide presence in the US). Then the Epik CEO answers that post suggesting how to circumvent the .US rules: > However, just use the free WHOIS privacy proxy. Problem solved. You will need to keep the privacy on in this case. That won't actually work because (as the Epik staff member points out in another reply to the Nigerian post) .US does not allow WHOIS privacy proxies.
  - lrae 5y ago
    I didn't link it to make Epik look good. Don't like Epik, don't like its CEO. But Epik is absolutely one if not the registrar you stumbled upon the last couple of years if you looked for good transfer prices. I just think users should give other users in this thread the benefit of the doubt that they weren't Epik customers to support a fascist, hardcore libertarian Christian, Nazi, ... CEO and his company in any form. They might just have googled for fair .com transfers and transferred a couple of domains in.
    - smoldesu 5y ago
      I don't bite. There's a whole diaspora of name registrars, but only one of them marketed themselves as the right-leaning choice (Rob Monster made damn sure of that). Hacks like this are the price of doing business with egomaniacs.

shiftpgdn 5y ago

How is that any different than a well lauded service like nearlyfreespeach.net? Just because you believe in the first amendment doesn't mean you should be the target of harassment.

gkoberger 5y ago
Every single registrar is targeted by hackers daily. I'm not convinced this is a sign of targeted harassment as much as just shoddy security practices.
- Natsu 5y ago
  The hackers in this case released a statement giving their exact reasons for doing this, though, and it was hacked precisely because it hosts badspeech. So it's not a random hack, they did this specifically to give information out to activists. I wonder if the media outlets will continue with their policies of not reporting on hacked info or not?
  - gkoberger 5y ago
    No media outlet in the world has ever had a policy of not reporting on hacks. Sure, they won't show the data or how to get it yourself, but that's crazy to say that media outlets don't report on hacks.
    - Natsu 5y ago
      Many were advocating exactly that, though: https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/responsible-reporting-in-an-age-of-irresponsible-information/ https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/responsible-reporting-in... Then at least some places put into place policies like that, though some were then modified later: https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/16/twitter-changes-its-hacked-materials-policy-in-wake-of-new-york-post-controversy/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/16/twitter-changes-its-hacked...
      - smoldesu 5y ago
        Twitter is not a "media outlet". That kind of mentality is the one that encouraged thousands to microwave their iPhone to charge it.
        Natsu 5y ago
        I agree that Twitter is not something generally trustworthy, but that ignores Twitter's role in breaking news. The many places that generally are called "media outlets" that have reported news with tweets as their primary sources to the point where I think you would have trouble finding a media outlet that is an exception.
eigengrau5150 5y ago
NFS.net probably wouldn't tolerate many of the clients that Epik takes pride in hosting, though they do take on some of that type to fund their MFFAM efforts. https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/about/faq?keywords=offensive&submit=Search+for+Keywords&form=1#BecauseFuckNazisThatsWhy https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/about/faq?keywords=offensiv... > What is the "MFFAM" policy? > Because we believe in free speech, we host a small amount of offensive content. Some days, that's really hard to do. There are views expressed using our service that we find personally repugnant. (Although we don't host as much of that type of content as one might expect, given our extremely broad Terms & Conditions of Service. The simple fact is that our service is for smart people, which disproportionately excludes people who hold those types of views.) > Nonetheless, our content policy does occasionally put us in a position of accepting money to host sites we find abhorrent. But we have no interest in profiting from sites like that. For that reason, since our founding in 2002, we have what we have more recently started calling the MFFAM policy: Morons Funding the Fight Against Morons. > When we find a repugnant site on our service, we mark the account. We receive reports about all payments to such accounts, and we take a portion of that money larger than the amount of estimated profit and we donate it to the best organization we can find. The best organization in any given case meets two criteria: > 1. The recipient organization does share our values. > 2. The recipient organization is as opposite (and hopefully as offensive) as possible to the site operator that funded the donation. > Examples of organizations that have received funding over the years include the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, local chapters of the NAACP, the National Bail Fund Network, the American Immigration Council, the Trevor Project, and others. > This policy isn't perfect by any means, but neither is the world we live in. MFFAM does let us help the organizations that we hope will eventually get us closer to that perfect world. It helps the people who operate repugnant sites understand that they are here because we tolerate them... barely... not because we endorse them or their views. It also does a pretty decent job of further thinning out the number of such sites, as a fair number of people who run them only believe in free speech when they're the ones talking.
john-doe 5y ago
https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/about/faq#BecauseFuckNazisThatsWhy https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/about/faq#BecauseFuckNazisT...

notadev 5y ago

I hadn’t heard any claims about unsavory customers until I was already a customer myself. I joined them because their Whois privacy was free while I had to pay for it on GoDaddy, nothing else.

somehnguy 5y ago
Namecheap offers it for free as well if you’re looking for a place to move. I use namecheap as my registrar and cloudflare for dns. Though the free namecheap dns worked completely fine for the years I used it too.
- notadev 5y ago
  Thanks, it looks like I’m going this route. It’s a bit pricey to transfer all domains at once so I have to pick and choose. For anyone else in the same boat, they offer a promo code “TLD21TS8” which reduces the transfer costs by 64%.

lrae 5y ago

> and the only reason any of us know about them is because they've worked so hard to attract unsavory customers No. Epik is (also) known for providing good prices for (medium sized) domain owners (and everybody else who just wanted to transfer their domains for a fair price.): https://www.namepros.com/threads/epik-com-promo-deals-and-happy-hour-mega-thread.1148974/ https://www.namepros.com/threads/epik-com-promo-deals-and-ha...

tzs 5y ago
That linked forum discussion does not exactly make Epik look good. The first post from someone not employed by Epik is someone from Nigeria asking if they can buy a .US domain. An Epik staff member tells them that .US are restricted to those with US contact information (which is almost correct--you need to be a US citizen, resident, organization, or a foreign entity with a bona fide presence in the US). Then the Epik CEO answers that post suggesting how to circumvent the .US rules: > However, just use the free WHOIS privacy proxy. Problem solved. You will need to keep the privacy on in this case. That won't actually work because (as the Epik staff member points out in another reply to the Nigerian post) .US does not allow WHOIS privacy proxies.
- lrae 5y ago
  I didn't link it to make Epik look good. Don't like Epik, don't like its CEO. But Epik is absolutely one if not the registrar you stumbled upon the last couple of years if you looked for good transfer prices. I just think users should give other users in this thread the benefit of the doubt that they weren't Epik customers to support a fascist, hardcore libertarian Christian, Nazi, ... CEO and his company in any form. They might just have googled for fair .com transfers and transferred a couple of domains in.
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    I don't bite. There's a whole diaspora of name registrars, but only one of them marketed themselves as the right-leaning choice (Rob Monster made damn sure of that). Hacks like this are the price of doing business with egomaniacs.