RE: [nc-whois] Contribution Of Globally, Publicly AccessibleWHOIS Information To Identity Theft And Other Fraud
I do sincerely wonder why non-disclosure of personal data is not even
considered a viable option.
As the FTC writes and is omitted below; "In this vein, the FTC advises
consumers not to disclose personal information"
And a mojor source for incorrect data is discovered again.
Options as suggested by Brett are "funky" but not to the point, add huge
amounts of email (Bandwidth=$) and not to mention process activity on
servers, seeing as my "local" dns servers handle several hundred of
whois requests a day, they would then have to generate and send an
email, in which case I would close port 43 in no time at all, as would
This leaves unjust loads on registries and registrars who then in a
"implementation committee" would rule this out as "not supported by the
majority" and "to expensive" to implement.
Lots of work done, nice suggestion, but lost again.
Reality serves even the IP contituency to look at ways to serve their
purpose without having publicly disclosed data on open ports.
Reality serves all to define those that should have access, why they
should have access and such (refering to my prior email)
There is no need for anyone to have "open and public" access to personal
data as home adddress and phonenumbers except for the sake of
convenience and low overhead.
It is in my opinion not the TF's task to provide "handy tools" for
anyone, but to report on the functioning of and possible future of the
I would like to use this moment in time to emphasise that I would want
to see my opinion whether it is consensus or exception, in the issue
reports going to the GNSO.
With kind regards
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Bret Fausett
> Sent: 07 March 2003 19:27
> To: whois
> Subject: Re: [nc-whois] Contribution Of Globally, Publicly
> AccessibleWHOIS Information To Identity Theft And Other Fraud
> Ruchika Agrawal wrote:
> > and if consumers choose to disclose personal information,
> they should
> > know who is collecting the information, why the information
> is being
> > collected, and how it is going to be used.
> One theory of privacy protection is simply to increase
> transparency about who has information about you so you can
> take steps to protect yourself. I think it was Becky Burr who
> made the suggestion that a whois service that notified the
> registrant when someone looked them up in the whois database
> would be a valuable addition. I like that. It shouldn't be
> too hard to send the registrant the IP address, and perhaps
> more information if you used a registration system for users
> of the whois, of the person who looked them up and the date
> when their record was reviewed.
> -- Bret