4 ms·

I felt a bit limited by this, so I've just knocked up a similar tool with far more flexibility. Still actively developing it, but it's far quicker already. htt

by shocks 15y ago

I felt a bit limited by this, so I've just knocked up a similar tool with far more flexibility. Still actively developing it, but it's far quicker already. http://dev.mindfuzz.net/domain/ http://dev.mindfuzz.net/domain/ Edit: Grammar.

larrys 15y ago
Much better. I like this. Reminds me of when I did the same thing years ago with regexs to grab 3/4 letter .com (really there were so many available back then you had to whittle the list down).
- shocks 15y ago
  Thanks! I'm looking at adding more tld's and words/synonyms.
arkitaip 15y ago
This returns lots of false positives. Certain patterns, LLLL, result in very small result sets (5 items) but when re-searching the pattern, a different set is returned.
- shocks 15y ago
  Yes, because I use more of a Monte Carlo approach than a systematic approach. zegup.com is always alphabetic, but since the results are so slow it could take a long time to get to the end of the alphabet.
  - RuggeroAltair 15y ago
    +1 for randomizing. do you produce the string with the monte carlo choosing within a specific subset? I'm not sure why it wouldn't produce more than 5 combinations and then 5 different combinations... also, if you have-time/like, you can probably implement a quick hash on the fly for the domains already returned to avoid listing the same domain twice in a search with few alternatives, it should be quick. but cool tool!
    - shocks 15y ago
      Hash is a great idea. Thanks! I'll implement the hash now. I build an array of arrays where each subset array has all the possibilities for that letter. So if the query was N then a[0] = [0,..,9]. Then I just pick a random element from each subset array and stitch them all together in order.
Dejital 15y ago
Great tool. Returned some false positives for me. Also, searching for a specific domain in all lower case will "find" that domain 50 times.
- shocks 15y ago
  Ah yes I completely forgot to stop duplicates. I'll just add that now. Checking if a domain name is registered can be a trick task. The only reliable method is to run a whois; but most hosts only search a fraction of the whois records (perhaps just .com) and also limit your queries. You need to pay money to make mass requests. I have opted to check for any kind of DNS record. That means registered but unused domains will still return available, but the trade off is that it's very quick, pretty accurate most of the time and most importantly free. :)
johnstalcup 15y ago
i like this. the page is pretty, results are fast, and the letter based slots specification is nice. but i think the results are pretty low quality (gibberish).
- shocks 15y ago
  Thanks for your comments. :) I agree that the quality of the results are not of the best quality, but I think it can used to source some interesting information. Warner Brothers appear to have registered batman[1-9].com, heh.

by shocks 15y ago

larrys 15y ago

Much better. I like this. Reminds me of when I did the same thing years ago with regexs to grab 3/4 letter .com (really there were so many available back then you had to whittle the list down).

shocks 15y ago
Thanks! I'm looking at adding more tld's and words/synonyms.

arkitaip 15y ago

This returns lots of false positives. Certain patterns, LLLL, result in very small result sets (5 items) but when re-searching the pattern, a different set is returned.

shocks 15y ago
Yes, because I use more of a Monte Carlo approach than a systematic approach. zegup.com is always alphabetic, but since the results are so slow it could take a long time to get to the end of the alphabet.
- RuggeroAltair 15y ago
  +1 for randomizing. do you produce the string with the monte carlo choosing within a specific subset? I'm not sure why it wouldn't produce more than 5 combinations and then 5 different combinations... also, if you have-time/like, you can probably implement a quick hash on the fly for the domains already returned to avoid listing the same domain twice in a search with few alternatives, it should be quick. but cool tool!
  - shocks 15y ago
    Hash is a great idea. Thanks! I'll implement the hash now. I build an array of arrays where each subset array has all the possibilities for that letter. So if the query was N then a[0] = [0,..,9]. Then I just pick a random element from each subset array and stitch them all together in order.

Dejital 15y ago

Great tool. Returned some false positives for me. Also, searching for a specific domain in all lower case will "find" that domain 50 times.

shocks 15y ago
Ah yes I completely forgot to stop duplicates. I'll just add that now. Checking if a domain name is registered can be a trick task. The only reliable method is to run a whois; but most hosts only search a fraction of the whois records (perhaps just .com) and also limit your queries. You need to pay money to make mass requests. I have opted to check for any kind of DNS record. That means registered but unused domains will still return available, but the trade off is that it's very quick, pretty accurate most of the time and most importantly free. :)

johnstalcup 15y ago

i like this. the page is pretty, results are fast, and the letter based slots specification is nice. but i think the results are pretty low quality (gibberish).

shocks 15y ago
Thanks for your comments. :) I agree that the quality of the results are not of the best quality, but I think it can used to source some interesting information. Warner Brothers appear to have registered batman[1-9].com, heh.