[145094] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Nxdomain redirect revenue
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Allen Simpson)
Tue Sep 27 13:11:47 2011
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 13:11:32 -0400
From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
To: "Schiller, Heather A" <heather.schiller@verizon.com>
In-Reply-To: <B9EBD2474913AD4A995B8C7B8BEF8C0E14F674890D@FHDP1LUMXC7V43.us.one.verizon.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
>> On 9/26/11 4:29 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Is this with strict NXDOMAIN rewriting, or were existing names
>> redirected as well? (AFAIK, most platforms do the latter, hijacking
>> bfk.de, for example.)
>>
I responded:
> Has anybody tried bringing a criminal complaint for interference with computer (network) data?
>
> Certainly, hijacking google.com NS records to JOMAX.NET would be a criminal interference. After all, that's all DNSsec signed now, isn't it?
>
> Arguably, substituting a false reply for NXDOMAIN would be, too.
>
> It's time to find a champion to lead the charge. Maybe Google?
>
On 9/27/11 12:34 PM, Schiller, Heather A top posted:
> Paxfire gets sued:
> http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20768-us-internet-providers-hijacking-users-search-queries.html
> http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/08/08/38796.htm
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2390529,00.asp
>
> Paxfire files counter suit:
> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110809/17305215460/paxfire-responds-says-it-doesnt-hijack-searches-will-seek-sanctions-against-lawyers.shtml
> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110906/03371515808/paxfire-sues-lawyers-individual-who-filed-class-action-lawsuit-over-its-search-redirects.shtml
> http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/9/prweb8765163.htm
>
Thanks, Heather, I didn't know/remember about the civil suit. Good start.
But I'm talking about criminal. They're different.
