Re: [ga] Stolen domains, transfers, WHOIS, audit trails, and system integrity

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

Allan and all assembly members,

Allan Liska wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: MD5
>
> Hello George,
>
> Saturday, December 7, 2002, 1:35:25 AM, you wrote:
>
> GK> If XYZ.com was hijacked tomorrow, how would the owners of XYZ.com have
> GK> *proven* that they owned it today? The losing registrar's word? The
> GK> gaining registrar would have a legitimate client who might say that
> GK> they received the domain legitimately....let's make the chain of
> GK> ownership stronger, and transparent, as it's not like that today. Now
> GK> that .com is stabilizing, most of the action will be in "churn", not
> GK> initial registrations, and if those movements aren't safe then it
> GK> creates greater risk for the market participants.
>
> While I completely agree with your statement, wouldn't the losing
> registrar have a backup of their database?

  No reason why this could not be done.  And it should be.  Some
registrars do have such backups of their registrar database(s)...

> This should be enough to
> show they had ownership of the domain?

  The registrar does not "Own" any registration.  The registrant should.
But in reality the registry owns the Domain Name...

> Perhaps ICANN should include
> provisions in their registrar agreement for database backups?

  They should yes.  But the problem here is that such would require
ICANN to have the ability to enforce such provisions.  ICANN
has shown clearly that it has trouble a times keeping it's web pages
available or up to date.  The ICANN staff has on a number of occasions
stated clearly that it cannot or will not enforce it's own contractual
RAA provisions already has.  ICANN has shown it will abide
by it's contractual requirements in the White Paper and the MoU.
How than, can any reasonable person expect ICANN to adequately
enforce and of it's own RAA provisions?

>  There
> are standards of backup required for data to be admitted as evidence
> in court, ICANN can hold registrars to the same level?

  Again ICANN has shown that it cannot even abide by it's own
contract agreements in the White Paper and MoU...  How than
can one reasonably expect the ICANN Staff or BoD oversee
and enforce it's own RAA contracts with registrars?

>
>
> allan
> - --
> Allan Liska
> allan@allan.org
> http://www.allan.org
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6
>
> iQCVAwUAPfGh2ikg6TAvIBeFAQHYNAQAp6SN8XgPPgeRvgYxk526yVtF/Hhk/IEG
> zxOLbMDMQCmsuOlnVQ7xPRQfBohsK8BwxjaxGNJLgAiiJKYB+G4ac/LlnHeSRRT7
> HEWjWrIBLP/qe+28ctEEKYH4p8qltQ5JxvUwbqJEJthdjAorvZ981C/ycchjGzSE
> PknphS/QJ9o=
> =oQ6q
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> 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

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders 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: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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