Re: [ga] Bulk WHOIS Data Issue

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Don and all assembly members,

Don Brown wrote:

> I knew all that, but the point remains and, incidentally, it was not
> narrowly focused on DMV information, either...

  Ok, but it didn't and still doesn't seem that you do or did "knew all that"
as you say Don.  (More on that below your further comments below).
And yes it is of course not just focused on DMV information either.

>
>
> The point was, and is, that there is much more information already
> readily available from other sources. If a criminal wants to find out
> your address, there are plenty of ways for that to be achieved. I
> seriously doubt that a criminal would use the whois, since there is
> much more information available elsewhere.

  Well I tell  you what Don, I will bet you at $50.00 US you can't
even get my DMV number from Publicdata.com.  As I indicated
earlier on this post, you can have your DMV number protected
in Texas an 10 other states that I am aware of from public view.
And ONLY verified law enforcement agency officials will have
access.  Same is true as you should know for property that that
has been filed under the "Homestead Act of Texas", for your personal
private residence.

>
>
> Incidentally, do you really believe that a criminal is going to comply
> with the restrictions imposed by publicdata.com or just agree to them
> on-line and do whatever he wishes?

  No I don't of course.  But that really doesn't matter as I stated and
verified myself above and on my previous post on this thread...

> Heck, if hanging out some rules
> makes a difference, then I'm compelled to hang on the doors and windows
> of my house all the rules for entry -- like, for instance, you can't
> rob us... That would save me over $100 year for the burglar alarm
> service and, I'm sure, it would make my wife sleep much easier, too.
> The point is, obviously, the restrictions don't hold water - even the
> DMV information is readily available to anyone who agrees to the
> restrictions.

  No it is not.  As the restrictions you referenced rightly indicated as well
as the option not to have that data even listed in public records for
public view as again I indicated in my previous posts on this thread.

>
>
> Worrying about the limited scope of whois information doesn't even
> rise to the level of treating the symptoms, rather than treating the
> disease, like Congress did when they passed the DPPA. The Whois
> information is trivial and it is needed by ISP's to serve their
> customers, among other things.

  It is not needed by ISP's to serve their customers.  My ISP for
this very account can verify that and have a number of times.

>
>
> Want to find out my address?  Just goto
> http://www.dalcoelections.org/voters.asp and type in Brown, Donald.
> I'm the real one - the rest are imposters. :-) Not only do you get the
> street address, but also a convenient map.
>
> Do you want to know who lives at a certain address in Dallas and the
> appraised value of their house? Just goto
> http://www.dallascad.org/dcadressearch.html and just enter a street
> name -- try clubhouse.

  I don't live on a street Don.  Neither do about 10% of americans.
And after checking some other of our members that do live on a street
in the Dallas area, the URL you provided, which I have seen for the
first time (Thank you for that, BTW), their home address is not listed
either because they have filed a "Homestead Act filing" on that property
I believe or have had their address removed by request.

> It returns appraised value, address, owner name
> and the actual address of the owner even when different from the
> property address and, incidentally, also a convenient map to the
> property -- plus other info, as well.

  Doesn't list any of that information for my address or the other piece
of property in Grayson County that I own.  It also doesn't list the property
of three other of our members that live here in the Dallas area either that I
just checked and happen to know...

>
>
> How about, who owns a certain telephone number and their address?
> There a plenty of search engines readily available on the Internet. I
> use them all the time in an effort to verify credit card information,
> in fact.

  Well as my Phone number is not listed I again would bet you another
$50.00 US you could not fine mine either by Home Phone Number.

>
>
> This whole thing reminds me of the of those radical, separationist,
> paramilitary types who are camped out in the woods, with a stock pile
> of food, a deep bomb shelter and are training for the time they have
> to fight the U.S. Gov for their continued freedom. Mostly
> under-educated, but righteous and focused, never-the-less.

  Well I do live out in the country.  Have most of my life sense I was
borne.  Does that make me and others like me "radical, separationist,
paramilitary types who are camped out in the woods, with a stock pile
of food, a deep bomb shelter and are training for the time they have
to fight the U.S. Gov for their continued freedom."?  I don't think so!
So such a characterization is really not very accurate nor reasonable
as so few people would meet that criterion.

>
>
> Realistically, you were neither stalked or had your identity stolen
> because of the whois data.

  No I didn't have my identity stolen of was stalked due to Whois data.
But others have that has been reported at the last MdR ICANN Meeting
as well as to the FBI right here in Dallas...

> That was noise and sensationalism.

  No it really wasn't. If you care to really check (See comment just above)
you would of course know that.

> I
> think it is a real stretch making whois info sensational, too.

  I agree.  I also think that making ever registrants personal and private
information for public review is a bit sensational and extreme as well...
Hence why the only really needed information regarding contact
for a registrant is in the Admin. Data fields...

>  You
> didn't state that specifically, but it was, never-the-less, an
> implication.  It has no merit WRT this discussion, either.

  I didn't make such a statement as to insure no such implication
could be reasonably assumed.  I guess that some jump to
assumptions that are not there...

>
>
> It's shooting mosquitos with double 00 buck shot and it's misplaced
> WRT the trivial whois data.
>
> I respect your opinion, but just like the last post, this post did not
> meaningfully support it very well.

  Perhaps in your view, yes.  Perhaps in others view, no...
But in our members view, your view is a bit off the mark in this
instance...

>
>
> Let's move on.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sunday, April 21, 2002, 4:56:45 PM, Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> JW> Don and all assembly members,
>
> JW>   Yes Don I am a registered member/user of http://www.publicdata.com
> JW> and have been for some time now.  However if you read the specifics
> JW> and than check with Texas state statute very strong restrictions are
> JW> in place for Texas as well as 10 other states.  See:
> JW> http://www.publicdata.com/cgi-win/logon.exe?Process=tacDsply&tacCert=DMV&tacState=Yd&tacCntl=E&dlnumber=DEMO&dlstate=DEMO&id=DEMO#DPPA
> JW> Which contains but is not restricted to the following:
>
> JW> "Driver's License and Motor Vehicle Information Restrictions -
> JW>      Most States in the United States have adopted a close facsimile of the so-called Driver Privacy Protection Act (DPPA). Although two U.S. Federal Judges
> JW>      have ruled the DPPA to be unconstitutional and many other court challenges are still pending, most States have left their interpretation of the DPPA as
> JW>      Law. The DPPA has a list of exceptions that fits most uses of Driver's License and Motor Vehicle Information. If your use is described by one of the
> JW>      following, you are more than likely in compliance with this Law, but please check to make sure. Approved uses as described by the DPPA:
>
> JW>      Select one of the following radio buttons to indicate your compliance with that particular section of the DPPA.
>
> JW>          1. For any use in the normal course of business by me as a legitimate business or an agent, employee, or contractor of a legitimate business, for
> JW>           one of the two following purposes:
> JW>                to verify the accuracy of personal information submitted to the business, agent, employee, or contractor by an individual;
> JW>                in case personal information submitted to the business, agent, employee, or contractor by an individual is incorrect or no longer is correct,
> JW>                to obtain the correct information, for the sole purpose of preventing fraud, by pursuing legal remedies against, or recovering on a debt or
> JW>                security interest against, the individual.
> JW>          2. For any use if the requesting person has written consent of the person about whom the information is sought;
> JW>          3. For any use in research activities or in producing statistical reports, where the personal information will not be published re-disclosed, or used
> JW>           to contact an individual;
> JW>          4. For any use by an insurer, insurance support organization, or self-insured entity, or by an agent, employee, or contractor of that type of entity,
> JW>           in connection with a claims investigation activity, anti-fraud activity, rating, or underwriting;
> JW>          5. For use in providing notice to the owner of a towed, impounded, immobilized, or forfeited vehicle;
> JW>          6. For use by a licensed private investigative agency or licensed security service for any purpose permitted under the DPPA
> JW>          7. For any use by an employer or by the agent or insurer of an employer to obtain or verify information relating to the holder of a commercial
> JW>           driver license or permit that is required under the "Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986" as now or hereafter amended;
> JW>          8. For any use in connection with the operation of a private toll transportation facility;
> JW>          9.Note: This sub-section has been dropped from the Driver Privacy Protection Act.
> JW>           For bulk distribution for surveys, marketing, or solicitations, where the information will be used, rented, or sold solely for bulk distribution for surveys,
> JW>           marketing, or solicitations;
> JW>         10. For the use of a government agency, including, but not limited to, a court or law enforcement agency, in carrying out its functions, or for the
> JW>           use of a private person or entity acting on behalf of an agency of this state, another state, the United States, or a political subdivision of this state
> JW>           or another state in carrying out its functions;
> JW>         11. For any use in connection with a civil, criminal, administrative, or arbitral proceeding in a court or agency of a state, the United States, or a
> JW>           political subdivision of a state or before a self-regulatory body, including, but not limited to, use in connection with the service of process,
> JW>           investigation in anticipation of litigation, or the execution or enforcement of a judgment or order;
> JW>         12. For any use pursuant to an order of a court of a state, the United States, or a political subdivision of any state;
> JW>         13. For any other use specifically authorized by law that is related to the operation of a motor vehicle or to public safety;
> JW>         14. For any use in connection with matters regarding motor vehicle or driver safety and theft; motor vehicle emissions; motor vehicle product
> JW>           alterations, recalls, or advisories; performance monitoring of motor vehicles, motor vehicle parts, and dealers; motor vehicle market research
> JW>           activities, including, but not limited to, survey research; and removal of non-owner records from the original owner records of motor vehicle
> JW>           manufacturers;
> JW>         15. For any use in order to carry out the purposes of either the "Automobile Information Disclosure Act", the "Motor Vehicle Information and Cost
> JW>           Saving Act", the "National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966", the "Anti-Car Theft Act of 1992", or the "Clean Air Act", all as now or
> JW>           hereafter amended, for use in connection with one or more of the following matters:
> JW>                motor vehicle or driver safety and theft;
> JW>                motor vehicle emissions;
> JW>                motor vehicle product alterations, recalls, or advisories;
> JW>                performance monitoring of motor vehicles and dealers by motor vehicle manufacturers;
> JW>                removal of non-owner records from the original owner records of motor vehicle manufacturers."
>
> JW> Hence Don, my previous comments in brief on previous posts on this thread..
>
> JW> Don Brown wrote:
>
> >> For an example of what I was talking about, see
> >> http://www.publicdata.com/ and click on the current database
> >> offerings.  You will find a db for Driver's License, License Plates,
> >> Vehicle Identification Number, Voter Registration, Real Estate.  The
> >> DMV information is subject to the terms and conditions, which are
> >> restrictive, but they do not require the user to be a Peace Officer,
> >> as was stated.
> >>
> >> With respect to real estate, go to this URL
> >> http://www.dallascad.org/dcadressearch.html
> >> and just enter the street name of clubhouse.
> >>
> >> Public information, such as what I mentioned in this and the prior
> >> post, is generally available to the public. There are some
> >> restrictions (the driver's Privacy Protection Act, for one) imposed
> >> upon its use in certain cases.
> >>
> >> I do agree that some of the information is subject to restricted
> >> use and that some of the information is not uniformly available.
> >> However, that doesn't equate to being "way off base."
> >>
> >> It is difficult to comprehend how one's identity could be stolen through
> >> the use of the current whois data.  There is no more information in
> >> the current whois than is available from a telephone book, Church
> >> directory, neighborhood directory, or voter registration databases,
> >> ( see http://www.dalcoelections.org/voters.asp ).  In fact, the voter
> >> registration and real estate links cited above, even include a map.
> >>
> >> I am, however, aware of a few stalking incidents due to the publicly
> >> available whois data.  The perpetrators were VeriSign, Register.com, Domain
> >> Registry of America, Domain Registry of Canada and others, who did
> >> their stalking by mailing a solicitation, which appeared to be an
> >> invoice, for the renewal of domain names.
> >>
> >> Again, I don't consider the publication of whois information as any
> >> real transgression of privacy and confidentiality or that it
> >> potentially exposes one to life threatening criminal activity.  I
> >> respect your opinion to the contrary, even though your post did not
> >> meaningfully support it very well."
>
> >>
> >>
> >> Sunday, April 21, 2002, 12:37:24 AM, Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >> JW> Don and all assembly members,
> >>
> >> JW> Don Brown wrote:
> >>
> >> >> O.K.  Let's see.  If you have the license plate number, you can look
> >> >> up the owner.
> >>
> >> JW>   Not in Texas unless you are a member of law enforcement and have
> >> JW> a need to know, such as a potential traffic violation in progress, ect...
> >> JW> Same in California, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri,
> >> JW> Georgia, and I believe also Nevada.
> >>
> >> >>  If you have the driver license number, you can look up
> >> >> the owner.
> >>
> >> JW>   Again not in Texas or California unless you are a member of law
> >> JW> enforcement without the drivers license holders expressed written
> >> JW> permission.
> >>
> >> >>  If you have the property address, you can look up the
> >> >> owner.
> >>
> >> JW>   Again not true in 11 states, including Texas in some instances...
> >>
> >> >>  I'm not totally sure about SS number, but I wouldn't doubt if
> >> >> a database is available on the net, as well.  If you have the phone
> >> >> number, even in some cases where they have not opted in, in TX, you can
> >> >> look up the owner.
> >>
> >> JW>   Yes in some states this is true.  In many countries it is not true...
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Are we getting bundled up in our socks over the confidentiality of the
> >> >> Registrant of a domain name?  Really?  Well, let's not.
> >>
> >> JW>   I respectfully disagree.  I am not interested in again going to court
> >> JW> over identity theft like I had to do in 1989.  I am not interested in having
> >> JW> myself or my daughters stalked due to some "Control Freak" Nut Job
> >> JW> looking up on WHOIS my name and finding personal private information
> >> JW> listed for me to make such a situation much easier for that "Control Freak"
> >> JW> Nut Job to do...
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Is this other information comparable to the available information
> >> >> about the registrant of a domain name?
> >>
> >> JW>   No it is not..  (See above again)
> >>
> >> >> Is the Pope Catholic?
> >>
> >> JW>   No he is Polish.  >;)
> >>
> >> >> Of course
> >> >> it is!  It is, indeed, the same kind of personal information one would
> >> >> find about the owner of a license plate, driver license, etc.
> >>
> >> JW>   Again not correct Don.  See above...  See state statutes for Texas,
> >> JW> California, Georgia, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, ect, ect...
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> However, my registration of a domain name is one heck of a lot more
> >> >> trivial than my license plate, driver license, social security number
> >> >> or the appraised value (yep, that's there, too) of my property.
> >>
> >> JW>   But neither the license plate, driver license, social security number
> >> JW> are as easily accessible as a Whois listing by name or Domain Name.
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I think some are hunting mosquitos with 00 buck shot rather than
> >> >> living in the real world. There is no confidentially issue here which
> >> >> will harelip the Governor, so let's move on.
> >>
> >> JW>   Well Don you wayyy off base.  Again see above...  <sigh>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Saturday, April 20, 2002, 6:26:27 PM, Cade,Marilyn S - LGA <mcade@att.com> wrote:
> >> >> CMSL> Jeff, do elaborate on the differences on what is listed in a "white pages" listing and WHOIS.
> >> >>
> >> >> CMSL> In white pages, name, address and telephone number is the typical listing. [unless there is an opt out, or situation Jeff described for Texas which requires opt in].
> >> >>
> >> >> CMSL> What is the difference with WHOIS listings?
> >> >>
> >> >> CMSL> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> CMSL> From: Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com]
> >> >> CMSL> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 8:25 PM
> >> >> CMSL> To: Cade,Marilyn S - LGA
> >> >> CMSL> Cc: ga@dnso.org; Alexander Svensson; Dan Halloran; Louis Touton; Mike
> >> >> CMSL> Palage; Antonio Harris; icann board address
> >> >> CMSL> Subject: Re: [ga] Bulk WHOIS Data Issue
> >> >>
> >> >> CMSL> Marilyn and all assembly members,
> >> >>
> >> >> CMSL>   Your of course very welcome Marilyn.  It is very important that
> >> >> CMSL> accurate information is decimated when making such comments
> >> >> CMSL> or statements.
> >> >>
> >> >> CMSL>   In any event comparisons of a phone # listing and private information
> >> >> CMSL> listed in WHOIS data are not really comparable, and therefore making
> >> >> CMSL> such comparisons is felonious at best.  Same of course is true with
> >> >> CMSL> property ownership listings.  Apples and tomatoes...
> >> >>
> >> >> CMSL> Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >> Jeff, thanks for  providing more accurate information about a practice in one state at least.  I wasn't aware of that but I am sure that residents of Texas appreciate it!  Marilyn
>
> JW> -snip old stuff for posting size limit -
>
> JW> Regards,
> JW> --
> JW> Jeffrey A. Williams
> JW> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
> JW> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> JW> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> JW> E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> JW> Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
> JW> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
>
> ----
> Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA     Internet Concepts, Inc.
> donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net         http://www.inetconcepts.net
> PGP Key ID: 04C99A55              (972) 788-2364  Fax: (972) 788-5049
> Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
> ----

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


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