Re: [ga] WHOIS policy primer

[Don Brown <donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net>]

This is a complicated, or multi-faceted, issue and I am not sure of
the right answer.

All I know is that, in practice, we consult the WhoIs database
frequently. Whether we are proficient at what we do is an entirely
different issue, but we think we are.

We could probably live without this resource, but why should anyone
want to have to do the same job with less resources?

If the availability of the WhoIs data has caused some harm to anyone,
then it should be a point of concern.  Automobiles have also caused
some harm, but that's a different subject.

Perhaps regulation of the users of the data is better and more
absolute than revoking access to all.  Maybe that idealistic and not
very pragmatic, but here has to be a coming together somewhere.

Thanks,


Tuesday, August 27, 2002, 6:46:00 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com> wrote:
KA> On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, todd glassey wrote:

>> becuase there MUST be some way of registering a data base wherein the owner
>> operators of domains are accessible. If not WHOIS, then what?

KA> That is a fallacy.

KA> There is no operational reason to have publicly visible contact
KA> information for a domain name.

KA> The only reason that such information has been required has been to
KA> placate the intellectual property interests who demand to know who domain
KA> name owners are (but who want to hide their own identities when they file
KA> WLS subscriptions.)

KA> The contact information for IP addresses does have operational value,  
KA> is more likely to be correct, and the lookup key (the IP address) is much 
KA> less likely to be forged than a domain name.

KA> If you want to know from whence something is coming or has come, look to 
KA> the IP address then go to the IP allocation databases maintained by the 
KA> RIRs.

KA> Of course, with any database containing personally identifiable
KA> information, the rules of access ought to require that you leave your own
KA> identity and proof of that identity so that the data subject can know you
KA> were looking.  But there is no such obligation placed on those who mine 
KA> DNS/whois for commercial gain or worse.

>> because the WHOIS entry pertains to the public name that you are publishing.
>> By that act, the registering of a domain name, there is an inherent
>> agreement to be published in WHOIS.

KA> If that were the case then the identity of those buying WLS subscriptions
KA> would have been made public.

KA> Having known people who have been stalked as a result of DNS/whois 
KA> information, and having myself received mountains of whois derived e-mail, 
KA> fax, and phone spam, I do not believe that there is even a close balance 
KA> of equities on the social contract that you suggest.

KA> DNS/Whois is a holdover from the days of the net when we all knew one
KA> another (and we would all fit into one meeting room in Pacific Grove,
KA> California.)  The DNS/whois of today is a violation of all privacy
KA> principles that have evolved over the last three decades.

KA>                 --karl--


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




----
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
----

--
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