Krebs literally posts a PNG image citing court filings listing 10 IP addresses responsible for 100% of DNS traffic for a public domain name over a period of 4.5

Krebs literally posts a PNG image citing court filings listing 10 IP addresses responsible for 100% of DNS traffic for a public domain name over a period of 4.5 months. Actual origin of the underlying data is never explained, of course, but I do like how the total of the 10 is explicitly listed as 100%! Nevermind the internet bots scanning the whole internet, DomainTools and PassiveTotal reportedly having a long-term record of these same domain names since 2010 (for the "old" mail1 domain) and 2009 (for the "new" domain at the same IP address), respectively, and many other internet scanning services knowing about it, too, as per Ankura's 2020 report linked in the sibling comment. When did Krebs stop being an investigative journalist and went to being a political hack saying we shouldn't prosecute people for lying to the authorities to spur phantom investigations? Most ironic is an out of context quote from Paul Vixie about a conspiracy with out-of-band communication for DNS discovery, because clearly there's no other possible explanation for discovering public FQDNs that have been known to exist since 2009! Meanwhile, if you've ever looked at Paul's Twitter feed over the last 4 years, it's pretty clear which party he supports and which single president he despises and would have done anything to get rid of; but I'm sure that has no relevance to the case, and he is still being objective in suggesting conspiracy theories that involve DNS in some way, without ever bothering to verify the authenticity of the data that he's presented with to make public comments on. How's Krebs' the best take if it's the same lies propagated by the mainstream media? Not to mention that most DNS software doesn't even log any non-AXFR DNS requests at all (DNS works really fast over UDP and is very cheap unlike HTTP, and logging all requests to disk will slow down peak performance considerably), plus where the log comes from is never explained, either. Reminds me of diversion of media attention through "a story that nobody can disprove and which will be believed even if it's denied". Yes, Prime Minister, S2E2, "Official Secrets", ©1987 BBC.