VeriSign's WHOIS Woes

by InternetNews.com Staff [September 5, 2002]

VeriSign Ignored WHOIS Warnings
VeriSign (Nasdaq: VRSN) officials tried to minimize the damage caused by an Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) warning yesterday, which gave the .com and .net registry about two weeks to fix 17 violations in the WHOIS database.

It's a problem that likely wouldn't have come to light in the first place if VeriSign officials hadn't dismissed ICANN concerns.

Mary Hewitt, an ICANN spokeserperson, said "a couple of weeks ago, we gave them a final notice to fix these violations, and their answer was essentially, 'do whatever you want.' "

That pattern of neglect is what brought ICANN down on VeriSign in the first place, according to the announcement yesterday, which said ICANN's action was "based on a broad, longstanding pattern it has exhibited of failing to abide by its agreements to provide complete WHOIS data, and to take steps to correct reported inaccuracies in that data."

In an e-mail obtained by internetnews.com, Ross Rader, director of research and innovation at one of VeriSign's competitors, Tucows, Inc., posted a public query back on March 29 to Bruce Beckwith, a director at Network Solutions, asking when Network Solutions would work on its registrant's invalid e-mail and contact information.

"While we are on the subject of poor data integrity, can you provide an indication of when Verisign will be correcting the thousands of invalid email addresses in your whois that continue to show no.valid.email@worldnic.com?"

Rader got no response, he said, and doesn't expect one forthcoming.

"What (the ICANN warning) will do is get them to fix the 17 violations and hide their head in the sand with the other thousands they have in the database," he said. "It's no exaggeration that they have thousands of emails that are invalid."

But VeriSign does notify its registrants and has taken steps to ensure WHOIS entries are legitimate, said Patrick Burns, a VeriSign spokesperson.

"VeriSign takes all its obligations seriously," he said. "We have taken several steps to ensure it, including a mailing to all registrants back in June explaining our policies."

(Back to top)

Appeals Court Supports Sex.com
A U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit Friday gave credence to a landmark $65 million lawsuit over the sex.com domain.

In a unanimous ruling, the Federal Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit said appeals by defendant, Stephen Michael Cohen were an "egregious abuse of the litigation process." The court also said that since Cohen is a fugitive, he is not entitled to appeal the judgments rendered against him, including the award of $20 million in punitive damages.

The decision represents the likely end of the numerous court battles between plaintiff sex.com founder and CEO Gary Kremen of San Francisco and Cohen, who is living in Tijuana, Mexico, over the rights to the lucrative domain name.

The court separately affirmed Kremen's judgment against Montano Properties, LLC, a company created by Cohen to shelter his assets from the judgment in Kremen's favor. The court rejected the company's argument that its due process rights had been violated.

"It's a pretty resounding ruling," said Kremen's attorney James Wagstaffe. "This decision sends a message that fugitives can't continue to use our legal system."

Kremen registered the sex.com Web address in 1994 and regained control of it after the court's decision in November 2000. He now runs it as a "portal" with a search engine for adult content.

Kremen's separate appeal regarding the liability of Network Solutions, Inc. (now part of VeriSign) remains under submission at the court.

The lawyers said their appeal is based on its claim that Network Solutions did not make even a rudimentary attempt to verify a forged third-party letter that Cohen presented.

Further, they contend that NSI even went as far as to walk Cohen through the domain name registration process using both phone, fax and e-mail, and, therefore, they say the company should be held responsible for the damage caused by negligently transferring the sex.com domain.

(Back to top)

Warez Sites Listed on WHOIS
For some, namely adolescent kids, the thrill of doing something illegal is sometimes too tempting especially if there is very little chance of getting caught. For others, though, such as whose who host warez sites, where copyrighted software is available for free, it's about the spiraling cost of software that can be buggy and not worth the investment.

NXSonic is a site administrator for the warez forum group IX and NXS. NXSonic uses revenues from banner ad sales at legal sites to help pay for the maintenance of the warez site.

"It is my opinion people do it because we are tired of paying outrageous prices for software," NXSonic said in an instant messaging (IM) interview. "I mean, paying $300 for a word processing and spreadsheet suite is nuts. Of course there are alternatives that have some free suites like MS Office, but they also are resource hogs. I believe people also do it for the challenge of finding the software and the hint of doing something illegal."

With close to 800 registered members, the site caters to surfers looking for the latest applications and games for download, minus the cost of the software, naturally.

Avoiding the law isn't nearly as hard as most would think. Like the proverbial needle in a haystack, finding the sites in the first place can be a major headache. Even if they somehow do get caught, NXSonic said, most of the smart warez operators know how to avoid prosecution—they hope.

"As long as sites do not have actual software on the sites it is fine," he said. "The admins of some of the bigger forums sites have talked with lawyers and know the boundaries.

"Does it worry us?" he continued. "Sure, deep down everyone is a little scared but that is also what keeps us going."

What also keeps warez sites like NX and IX going is the state of affairs in the registrar business, which has a difficult time keeping up with the people who register for domain names and use them to operate their illegal sites.

Most of the contact information found in a WHOIS record for warez sites are bogus, from the phone number to the mailing address. The only legitimate-seeming contact method is through a relatively anonymous Web e-mail account.

Take, for example, NavNetwork.net, a forum that posts the links of popular software titles at warez sites. A look at its registration information shows the owner of the domain is "Someone, Nobody" in Ontario, Canada. The phone number (655) 556-6655 is phony, and you can contact the owner only at ssjnaval@hotmail.com.

His/her account is paid up until 2003.

Since the domain registration process is wholly automated, most registrars never even notice a new domain name has been claimed, other than a notation in a database. As long as the fees are paid, registrars are happy.

VeriSign, like most registrars, takes a passive approach to handling and eliminating illegal online piracy sites. After receiving notification of a potentially bogus registration, registrars attempt to contact the domain owner, a process that can take weeks.

"If we find out the registration information given to us is inaccurate, they will be found to be in breach of contract with us and we will delete them from the database," said Patrick Burns, a VeriSign spokesperson.

Of course, when the domain is shut down by a registrar, it goes back into the pool of available domain names for purchase, and there's nothing to stop "Someone, Nobody" from going right back and re-registering the name the next day.

This puts the burden of tracking down and closing down warez sites on organizations like the private sector's Business Software Alliance and federal law enforcement agencies. It's an uphill battle, they acknowledge, given the rapid pace of technology advances.

"We've got to be just as good as they are at how to get around the efforts they make to disguise their identities and work with law enforcement and civil justices around the country," said Bob Kruger, vice president of enforcement for the Business Software Alliance. "There's been some progress, both in the case of law enforcement attention and with the courts. They've had a period of time to get themselves up to speed and investigate and take appropriate action."

— End