Re: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?

["L. Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

On 7 Feb 2003 at 2:29, Ram Mohan wrote:

> + You misread what I said.  I said that providing *only* individuals the
> right to provide access to data works as long as the premise is that the
> individual supplies accurate/valid data.  However, some of the most
> egregious violators (such as domain slammers) wantonly provide false
> information - and those trying to get "their" domain name restored to them
> have a problem.

There are many who provide false information simply because of the 
publication of the information and the bulk access provided to third 
parties.  As long as these conditions exist, it is not practical to expect 
that folks will willingly provide personal information.  Yes, slammers are 
guilty, but so are many individuals who are simply not willing to have 
their personal information published in such an easily accessible 
database.

> 
> > If there are reasonable grounds to believe that someone has
> > violated a civil or criminal law, there are well established legal
> > procedures (many of which involve going before a neutral magistrate and
> > making a showing of those reasonable grounds) to obtain access to things
> > like domain name registration databases.
> 
> + Indeed.  As long as you can find someone/someplace to serve.  Or if the
> domain name database has accurate information to go after that
> individual/group.  The OECD case showed some interesting practical
> challenges to this approach.

Well, if the information were kept private, but held by the registrar or 
registry and made available via court order, finding someone / someplace 
to serve would not be the problem, would it.  The issue is how the 
personal information is handled in the first place.  It's the publication 
that is the issue, not the availability to law enforcement in criminal 
matters.  Civilian litigation legal service is another matter, however.  
Attorney's and complainants should not be simply given personal 
information without a court order.  Why should any individual aid those 
who wish to persecute them?

> 
> > And let's be careful not to turn whois into Megan's law in reverse: in
> > which internet users are forced to publish their (and their children's)
> > names, addresses, and phone numbers for the benefit of any and all
> > predators.
> 
> + I don't disagree with you on this.  I certainly get my share of spam,
> unsolicited calls, etc thanks to having accurate information available via
> Whois.

It's a lot more insideous than just spam and telemarketing.  There is a 
real danger to lives when stalkers and pedophiles can so easily obtain 
personal information.  There are, of course, the typical naysayers who 
don't believe this is a problem.  I can personally tell you that it is.  I 
have two pitt bulls because of it.

> 
> In reality, domain name Whois information represents a shrinking
> percentage
> of the total Internet (and world) population -- its relevance reduces
> every
> passing year.  You can pick up far more detailed, segmented demographic
> information about me (or you) through product registration databases that
> get updated when people send in registration cards for everything they buy
> - and which they don't realize is often distributed without their
> permission.

This is true and consumers should be educated about the use of these 
databases as well.  I know that I check with each company before 
registering anything I purchase and include in writing that the 
information provided may not be shared, period.  I also do not provide my 
home address or telephone number in most cases.  If registration is on the 
internet and a required field is my phone and address, I will not 
register.  If it is a company that is "trusted" and the form is insecure, 
I will not use it at all.  Note that congressional email is insecure.

> 
> There needs to be a place where accurate domain contact information
> resides.
> Access to this information ought to be restricted and differentiated.
> Permission needs to be sought.  Current practice is often a mess, and
> abused. 

You bet.

 Does this mean we should "completely disengage from the current
> system", as Ross suggests ?  Maybe Ross' suggestion is just about marketer
> use/abuse of Whois data, in which case I have nothing more to say on the
> topic.

I sincerely believe that the entire current system needs to be revamped.

Leah


--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html