5 ms·

>Dutch registrar was sued by Meta, which alleges the company ignores abuse complaints about phishing websites while monetizing traffic to those abusive domains.

>Dutch registrar was sued by Meta, which alleges the company ignores abuse complaints about phishing websites while monetizing traffic to those abusive domains. I wouldn't be surprised if they are ignoring those complaints because there's no one left to process them. They clearly struggle to keep the lights on, see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34194555 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34194555

Waterluvian 4y ago
Random curiosity: if they just go dark indefinitely, is there some authority that can assume authority over those TLDs? IANA or something?
- Macha 4y ago
  Since they're ccTLDs, the governments of those countries can designate new operators. The root nameservers (operated by a variety of operators, under ICANN's supervision) would have to update their top level record but they are generally hands off for ccTLDs (because if they were not, a country could just mandate its ISPs use a different set of root servers)
- CydeWeys 4y ago
  ICANN has EBERO with a standardized escrow format to deal with this exact issue for gTLDs but ccTLDs are pretty much a wild west. I wouldn't use these.
mr_toad 4y ago
> I wouldn't be surprised if they are ignoring those complaints because there's no one left to process them. Maybe, but Facebook is arguing otherwise: “ According to Meta, this isn’t just a case of another domain name registrar ignoring abuse complaints because it’s bad for business. The lawsuit alleges that the owners of Freenom “are part of a web of companies created to facilitate cybersquatting, all for the benefit of Freenom.””
- pjerem 4y ago
  Allegations are not proofs.
- shapefrog 4y ago
  “We believe that the genocide against Rohingya was possible only because of Facebook,” (all for the benefit of Facebook) Happy to see other allegations aired out, especially when the consequences are a little more than squatting .tk domains (I suspect the real problem is those pesky .ml domains).
- WhyNotHugo 4y ago
  > The lawsuit alleges that the owners of Freenom “are part of a web of companies created to facilitate cybersquatting, all for the benefit of Freenom.”” I'm looking forward to seeing them present evidence to back this alegation.
BiteCode_dev 4y ago
Also, abuse complaints are themselves abused so much that it's easily to want to tell the complainer to go to hell. Running 0bin.net, we have complaints from outside of our jurisdiction, false claims, idiotic claims, DMCA used for censorship, and so on. Once in a while we have a serious one, like CP or doxxing, so we read everything. But honestly, our hosting is forcing us to delete so much content based of BS complaints it's tiring. And if we refuse, we have to make our case, which unlike complaints, cannot be automatized. 9 times out of 10, the hosting tells us we should delete the content anyway, and if we wait to much, proceed to cut the power cord until we comply. I'm sure Meta does report some real website and phishing attempts, but I'm certain they also abuse their power like the GAFAM they are.

Waterluvian 4y ago

Random curiosity: if they just go dark indefinitely, is there some authority that can assume authority over those TLDs? IANA or something?

Macha 4y ago
Since they're ccTLDs, the governments of those countries can designate new operators. The root nameservers (operated by a variety of operators, under ICANN's supervision) would have to update their top level record but they are generally hands off for ccTLDs (because if they were not, a country could just mandate its ISPs use a different set of root servers)
CydeWeys 4y ago
ICANN has EBERO with a standardized escrow format to deal with this exact issue for gTLDs but ccTLDs are pretty much a wild west. I wouldn't use these.

mr_toad 4y ago

> I wouldn't be surprised if they are ignoring those complaints because there's no one left to process them. Maybe, but Facebook is arguing otherwise: “ According to Meta, this isn’t just a case of another domain name registrar ignoring abuse complaints because it’s bad for business. The lawsuit alleges that the owners of Freenom “are part of a web of companies created to facilitate cybersquatting, all for the benefit of Freenom.””

pjerem 4y ago
Allegations are not proofs.
shapefrog 4y ago
“We believe that the genocide against Rohingya was possible only because of Facebook,” (all for the benefit of Facebook) Happy to see other allegations aired out, especially when the consequences are a little more than squatting .tk domains (I suspect the real problem is those pesky .ml domains).
WhyNotHugo 4y ago
> The lawsuit alleges that the owners of Freenom “are part of a web of companies created to facilitate cybersquatting, all for the benefit of Freenom.”” I'm looking forward to seeing them present evidence to back this alegation.

BiteCode_dev 4y ago

Also, abuse complaints are themselves abused so much that it's easily to want to tell the complainer to go to hell. Running 0bin.net, we have complaints from outside of our jurisdiction, false claims, idiotic claims, DMCA used for censorship, and so on. Once in a while we have a serious one, like CP or doxxing, so we read everything. But honestly, our hosting is forcing us to delete so much content based of BS complaints it's tiring. And if we refuse, we have to make our case, which unlike complaints, cannot be automatized. 9 times out of 10, the hosting tells us we should delete the content anyway, and if we wait to much, proceed to cut the power cord until we comply. I'm sure Meta does report some real website and phishing attempts, but I'm certain they also abuse their power like the GAFAM they are.