Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Nominet Compromising UK WHOIS Privacy, Wants To See Gov't-Issued ID

timothy posted about a month ago | from the cat-detector-vans-are-on-the-way dept.

Privacy 71

ktetch-pirate (1850548) writes Earlier this week, Nominet launched the .uk domain to great fanfare, but hidden in that activity has been Nominet's new policy of exposing personal domain owners' home addresses. Justification is based on a site being judged "commercial," which can mean anything from a few Google ads or an Amazon widget, to an email subscription box or linking to too many commercial sites, according to Nominet reps. In the meantime though, they want your driving license or passport to ensure "accuracy" because they "want to make things safe."

cancel ×

71 comments

want to make things safe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47236675)

>UK story

Think of the children!

Oh, won't someone please think of the children!

Re:want to make things safe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47236689)

So, I went to print out a Slashdot article from my printer, and I found that the result wasn't a Slashdot article at all! What was it? What could it be, my fellow Slashdotters?

It was a rancid, feces-filled asshole! My cock is watering!

Re:want to make things safe (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | about a month ago | (#47237397)

And to fight Terrorism...

Re:want to make things safe (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about a month ago | (#47237709)

In that case, my advice: bring Tony Blair to trial.

Seems Prudent (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47236725)

Operation Just Cause. I Never Trust Phake-Registry Sites. Go With .name If You Want To Hide In Your Shell Rudy.

Re:Seems Prudent (2)

ktetch-pirate (1850548) | about a month ago | (#47236763)

Except that any personal site HAS to have their 'correct info' there, and any hint of 'commercialism' (such as linking to 'trading sites') and that private info - your home address - is now going to be published. I bet no-one can see absolutely ANYTHING wrong with that at all.... like pizza-bombing or SWATing (SO19-ing?) someone. Because that never EVER happens.

Re:Seems Prudent (0)

Noah Haders (3621429) | about a month ago | (#47236811)

Operation Just Cause. I Never Trust Phake-Registry Sites. Go With .name If You Want To Hide In Your Shell Rudy.

I'm waiting for Operation Just Cause 3. That will be awesome!!!

Re:Seems Prudent (0)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about a month ago | (#47236851)

As long as you're not waiting for Probable Cause. 'Cause we don't need that shit.

Re:Seems Prudent (0)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about a month ago | (#47236983)

Operation Just Cause. I Never Trust Phake-Registry Sites. Go With .name If You Want To Hide In Your Shell Rudy.

I'm waiting for Operation Just Cause 3. That will be awesome!!!

Unfortunately, it will only run on Xbox One and require Kinect.

Re:Seems Prudent (1)

davester666 (731373) | about a month ago | (#47237453)

Well, it involves a lot of hand-waving...and shouting...

Re:Seems Prudent (1)

bagofbeans (567926) | about a month ago | (#47237197)

You're on the train to nowhere...

Laws like European Electronic Commerce Directive (1)

tepples (727027) | about a month ago | (#47236729)

I wonder how much this has to do with an attempt to comply with statutes against anonymous Internet businesses [sitetruth.com] . Do these statutes have a reasonably rich body of case law yet?

Re:Laws like European Electronic Commerce Directiv (4, Informative)

Animats (122034) | about a month ago | (#47237099)

Right. The European Union has completely different privacy rules for individuals and businesses. For individuals, there's the European Privacy Directive, which gives Europeans much stronger privacy rights than in the US. For businesses, it's completely different. Online businesses face the European Electronic Commerce Directive, and have to disclose who's behind the business.

That's deliberate EU policy. The whole point of the single European market is to make it easy to buy and sell across national boundaries within the EU. So there are lots of EU rules which benefit consumers and prevent businesses from operating in the country with the weakest regulation.

The .us domain registrar doesn't allow anonymous registration, either. Actually, neither does ICANN. The registrant listed in Whois owns the domain. If that's some "private registration" front, they own the domain. This became a big deal when RegisterFly tanked and people with "private registration" discovered they really didn't own domains they thought were theirs. That took months to straighten out.

s/uk/doa/ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47236759)

Few will change domains over this.

the internet is growing up (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47236767)

There's more push now for real identities when signing up for youtube, gmail, yahoo mail, and many other online services. That trend is only going to continue as it becomes more and more important to be able to verify people's identities online.

Like it or not, that WILL happen. The original "nerd playground" of the internet is used by everyone now, and with that comes a lot of new responsibilities, laws, and regulations. I don't think it's possible to stop that trend because there is too much social force and will behind it. We don't let people drive cars anonymously without a license that tells exactly who you are and where you live. And in this case it's up to the private companies: they don't HAVE to give you service so if they want to require proof of r/l identity that is their right. You can opt out of that by not using their services.

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

DJ Particle (1442247) | about a month ago | (#47236821)

This is why my only official address is a UPS Box.

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

PPH (736903) | about a month ago | (#47238551)

address is a UPS Box.

Did you mean USPS Box (PO Box)?
Or has UPS begun a private mailbox service?
Or do you live in an actual UPS cardboard box?

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

DJ Particle (1442247) | about a month ago | (#47238807)

UPS bought out Mail Boxes Etc about 10 years back... since then, they've had a mailbox service.

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | about a month ago | (#47239131)

I was told a house without wheels was a step up. Are you suggesting there is something wrong with living in a UPS cardboard box?

Re:the internet is growing up (3, Interesting)

RelaxedTension (914174) | about a month ago | (#47236891)

You forget that the details being available is where things started, and the option for details to be hidden showed up because of the problems having that information openly available has caused. The "social will" you talk about is not society at at large, it is governments and law enforcement wanting that information out in the open for their own purposes. General society either outright prefers the ability to remain anonymous or could give a crap about the details being shown except in very specific cases.

Having a website in no way equates to driving a car, that is a ridiculous analogy. Your driver's license is not openly available to millions at any given time, and a website is not a large vehicle that can be driven into a crowd of actual flesh and blood people. And if the service provider has monopoly, where exactly do you take your business?

Can't opt out of all services (1, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about a month ago | (#47236903)

You can opt out of that by not using their services.

The government requires people to either A. purchase specific goods and services from private companies or B. go to prison. Indecent exposure laws require purchase of clothing. Vagrancy laws require owning or leasing a home. And universal healthcare laws require either buying private health insurance or making less than the poverty line.

Re:Can't opt out of all services (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237883)

You forgot car insurance, it seems that the govt are well into big corporations pockets and has been for well over a century, perhaps longer.

Re:Can't opt out of all services (1)

tepples (727027) | about a month ago | (#47238099)

Car insurance is not mandatory because owning or leasing a car is not mandatory.

Re:the internet is growing up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47236949)

You do realize that this is just lazying the police even more than they need to be, there was nothing wrong with the Yahoo ID or whatever breaking a law, police get involved and then Yahoo hand over the ISP contact details in turn the police subpoena said ISP for customer data.

This new system is trying to remove the ISP step, not sure THAT is such a good idea especially concerning the fact that Yahoo probably reside in another country which is different to that of the customer, different countries have different data protection laws.

Re:the internet is growing up (0, Flamebait)

bmo (77928) | about a month ago | (#47236997)

What a fucking boot-licker you are.

>nerd playground

Back when it was a "nerd playground" people used their real names more often than not. Because we didn't have to worry about morons like yourself. Because it was safe to do. Because we didn't have to worry about being pizza bombed or SWATted.

But that's entirely beside the point of idiots like you insisting that we should not have the right in e-space to call ourselves whatever the fuck we want as long as we're not trying to defraud anyone. THIS IS A RIGHT THAT EXISTS IN MEATSPACE you fucking tool.

Why is it that people such as yourself and FUCKING ERIC S. RAYMOND have a fucking huge problem with it? "They" - the people whose boots you are so willing to lick - do not give one flying fuck about you. Yet people like you and ESR want to give them the tools to remove any protections we have out here from criminals, corrupt politicians, police-states, and others. This war against anonymity is fucking odious, orwellian, and frankly fucking offensive as a wet fart on a hard wooden pew in church.

NO. FUCK YOU. IF YOU WANT TO USE YOUR REAL NAME, YOU GO RIGHT AHEAD AND USE IT. THE REST OF US WILL EXERCISE OUR RIGHTS IF WE CHOOSE TO. THE LIKES OF YOU AND ERIC S. RAYMOND AND HIS "HOTGIRL69 PROBLEM" CAN FUCK RIGHT OFF.

--
BMO.

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

ktetch-pirate (1850548) | about a month ago | (#47237037)

So very very true sir. Those who call for an end to privacy, usually have something to gain from it. A functioning society requires elements of privacy, or it will become dysfunctional.

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

bmo (77928) | about a month ago | (#47237113)

Those who call for an end to privacy, usually have something to gain from it.

Except that a lot of people who call for an end to privacy have nothing to gain and actually lose. ESR is one of those people, and I had to drop him from my G+ circles because I just couldn't stand the cognitive dissonance (doublethink, if we're going to use Orwell) any longer.

--
BMO

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

ktetch-pirate (1850548) | about a month ago | (#47237265)

I did say usually

Re:the internet is growing up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47238935)

[A] lot of people who call for an end to privacy have nothing to gain and actually lose. [This "Eric Raymond" person] is one of those people, and I had to drop him from my G+ circles because I just couldn't stand the cognitive dissonance (doublethink, if we're going to use Orwell) any longer.

Speaking of doublethink... Are you joking about the "G+ circles" thing? I had to drop go-Ogle into my HOSTS file because I actually do give a shit about my (and others') privacy. BTW, you don't have any "G+ circles" to begin with; everything on go-Ogle's sites is corporate (imaginary) property. Same with Facecrook; the only one who can legitimately say "my Facecrook" is Narc Fuckerburg.

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

bmo (77928) | about a month ago | (#47242543)

No, I'm not kidding.

I use g+ to follow Linus and others.

Wait, are you one of the guys who started putting X-NoArchive in the text of your usenet posts when DejaNews showed up?

>putting google in 0.0.0.0

There's being judicious about what you post, and then there's paranoia.

--
BMO

Re:the internet is growing up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237783)

But that's entirely beside the point of idiots like you insisting that we should not have the right in e-space to call ourselves whatever the fuck we want as long as we're not trying to defraud anyone.

They're just saying you can't use THEIR SERVICES if you aren't willing to abide by the terms they set out, which include using your real, verifiable identity. Often services require a mobile # now for that purpose.

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

bmo (77928) | about a month ago | (#47238215)

which include using your real, verifiable identity

Pray tell, which ones? None of the ones I use. Even online services that "require" a cell number really don't - they put in grayed out text a clickthrough to skip it, even Facebook.

If you're talking about banking and payment services, they've required your real identity in meatspace for hundreds of years, so it's not the same thing as what we're discussing here. All online services have unenforceable and unconscionable terms and conditions. I can require your first-born male as payment, but that doesn't mean it's legally binding, and such terms should be ignored as a matter of course. I do. If you don't, you're a fool.

The last time an online service required my meatspace identity, it was the Chebucto Freenet back in the early 90s that wanted a photocopy of my driver's license. But that was a different time and you could actually trust admins (that weren't Simon Travaglia) back then. It was also a different time back then when your domain record had your real name tied to it and you didn't have to worry about stalkers, idiots, and loons. Anyone who does that these days not hiding behind even a "paper" company name, is quite frankly a victim waiting to happen.

And lastly, the whole "we require a cellphone" nonsense can be worked around with stuff like this:
https://www.raymond.cc/blog/to... [raymond.cc]

Good fucking luck tying identity to SMS.

--
BMO

Re:the internet is growing up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237055)

Well I have to buy water from a private company and I dont have any choice in which company I use. There is no way I can cease to be their customer UNLESS I go to jail and according to the water company they have NO CONTRACT with me.

Tell me How do I not use their service?

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a month ago | (#47237109)

In theory you have the option of just not using water. Collect rain or buy bottled - you might need to get a chemical toilet or dig a hole in the garden, but someone might go to such lengths in protest. I didn't even get that: The water company is also the drainage company, and charge for the service of removing the water that falls on any land you own. Unless you can somehow stop it from raining, you have to pay.

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

whoever57 (658626) | about a month ago | (#47237599)

In theory you have the option of just not using water. Collect rain

In California, collecting rainwater is actually illegal. The water is owned by the city or state, or whoever, but not the homeowner.

But the whole premise of the argument is flawed. Although people pay for water to be delivered through pipes to their hoses, the largest cost that the bills cover is actually the removal and treatment of wastewater. So, yes, buy all your water in bottles, but then don't allow any water to go down your drains (so no showers and no toilets).

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

nmoore (22729) | about a month ago | (#47237827)

The water rights aren't necessarily owned by the government, but by the people downstream who were using the water before you [wikipedia.org] —maybe a municipal water system, but just as likely a farmer, an industrial plant, etc. By capturing rainwater you would be infringing on their private property rights in that water.

Colorado, in 2009, began issuing permits for residential rainwater collection, in part because of a study that showed that in some locations most rainwater evaporated or was used by plants before it reached a stream.

Re:the internet is growing up (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a month ago | (#47238711)

You can eliminate wastewater disposal with a bit of replumbing - if you need to, get a septic tank. But how can you stop it from raining?

Somewere I'm sure you can find a place where not only does the water company own the rain that falls on your property, but you've not choice but to pay them to take it away and pay them again to get it back.

the internet is growing up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47238181)

Says the Anonymous Coward...

whois already posts it (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a month ago | (#47236781)

mine address is in whois for every domain I own; sure there are a couple major shoddy registrars that will put in their address instead of yours for your domains but they completely suck for other reasons.

Re:whois already posts it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47236793)

I always use an old address and phone number that is no longer correct.

Re:whois already posts it (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a month ago | (#47236801)

awesome that you leave the stalkers the start of the bread crumb trail

Re:whois already posts it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237391)

It's a nice way to select for motivated, energetic stalkers. The casual ones are so boring.

Re:whois already posts it (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a month ago | (#47262457)

causal ones also less healthy for target by not promoting elevated heart and breathing rates and fleeing. Role of increased mental stimulation in helping staving off neural senescence or senility can't be ignored either

Re:whois already posts it (1)

Gavagai80 (1275204) | about a month ago | (#47239451)

This allows anyone who hates you to get your domain invalidated by complaining that the information is inaccurate.

Speaking of children... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47236947)

Has the price of preteens skyrocketed in Brazil the last few months? Something to do with the Olympics?

Domains By Proxy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237043)

Will the same private registration tricks that work here in The States (Like Domains By Proxy) work over in the UK too?

Re:Domains By Proxy (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a month ago | (#47237121)

I'm in the UK, and I use Domains by Proxy.

I work with a school. I occasionally give students the address of my server, as I've a couple of utilities up there I made for use in IT classes (A public-domain* music collection, a utility to make rollover graphics). I can't risk students finding out my home address! I'd get a brick through my window for all the games sites I blocked.

*Only in Europe. Sorry yanks.

Re:Domains By Proxy (1)

bl968 (190792) | about a month ago | (#47237183)

get a PO Box.

Re:Domains By Proxy (1)

whoever57 (658626) | about a month ago | (#47237613)

I'm in the UK, and I use Domains by Proxy.

That's fine if you are prepared to pay the large cost for DbP and never want to change registrars. I had some domains at Godaddy with DbP protection. I found that to move to another registrar, I had to first remove the domains from DbP, thus making the whois information public for a few hours during the transfer.

Nominet is typical British hypocrisy. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237097)

They always looked to have avoided the commercialisation of other country/international DNS services, but having known someone who crawled their way into the hierarchy with little knowledge of the system but an excellent politician, I learned that really they're just the same as any Verizon but with less honesty about how they operate.

This aside, the Nominet position has always been to require honest data but to allow people operating non-commercially to hide their information from whois. On the latter, frankly if you add Google Ads to your site then you ARE a commercial concern - the Internet doesn't get to redefine what type of moneymaking counts as moneymaking. On the former, again, it's about honesty: if you're going to allow people to register anonymously, state this, and show the steps you take to make it hard for your customers to be identified. Otherwise only the dishonest will register under false identities, while those trying to be hidden for legitimate reasons (e.g. political) will end up being easy to discover anyway.

Re:Nominet is typical British hypocrisy. (3, Insightful)

ktetch-pirate (1850548) | about a month ago | (#47237259)

The main problem is the constant 'goal shifting'. First it was because there was a widget link to Amazon for my book [slashdot.org]
I disabled it Then it was "I had google adverts". I disabled them. Then I had 'lots of links to trading sites" and "email subscription module" And then I filed a complaint for being absurd, and so the next morning they published my home address. UK Gov calls a business anything that makes a profit. It also accepts that hobbies can bring in some money, but when it becomes profitable, then it's not a business and is a hobby. Nominet calls a site commercial based on the "I'll know it when I see it" standard, with an extremist mindset.To quote the 'senior Nominet Customer advisor' who was chosen to deal with this case,

I would like to agree with a point you raised 'pretty much ANY website is a 'trading website''. This is the case and it's rare that a .uk domain name is able to opt-out of having their address details displayed.

It's the same as indecency. What's acceptable to one, may be offensive to another. Should we go to the extremist view, 'skin showing is indecent' to appease the extremists, or should things reflect societal norms? Like 'all skin is indecent', anything involving anything commercial, even at one remove, makes this site commercial' is an extremist view. Does linking to your twitter profile, or a facebook page make you 'commercial'? Just read a good book, and wanted to share that on your site, with a link to where you can buy it means you're a business? Nominet says so. is that normal in the current state of society?

Re:Nominet is typical British hypocrisy. (1)

whoever57 (658626) | about a month ago | (#47237633)

Perhaps it depends on the person at Nominet who assesses the site, or perhaps the goalposts have moved. I once reported a site to Nominet for blocked Whois information because the site was promoting a product, although actual puchases were made through another (linked) site. Nothing happened. The site remained as "The registrant is a non-trading individual", even though it clearly was not.

Re:Nominet is typical British hypocrisy. (1)

ktetch-pirate (1850548) | about a month ago | (#47238327)

I was first told that stuff by their 'front line' staff (who turned out to have only worked for Nominet since March, all her pervious work was working in clothing stores, or as a hairdresser, except for a brief period as a software salesperson (her public linkedin profile is at the bottom of the 3rd link)

That quote is by their 'second level' support, who took over the issue at the direction of the acting customer service head, following my complaint.

It was reiterated by the acting head of customer services in emails this week.

If it had been one person, sure, I can see it. It was 3, a newbie, a long term senior support, and the executive in charge of support.
That puts it very much in the 'deliberate' category. More goalpost moving than in a Dolly Sisters v Dimwell Shove.

this should apply to all domains worldwide (4, Interesting)

bl968 (190792) | about a month ago | (#47237181)

Every single domain should have accurate and verifiable information for the owner, administrative, and technical contacts. The use of services which anonymize or mask domain owners should be prohibited.Whois was intended to enable you to identify the ownership of a domain and who to contact about it.

Re:this should apply to all domains worldwide (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237321)

The use of services which anonymize or mask domain owners should be prohibited.

Fuck you, and everyone who thinks like you. If I want to be anonymized, then I'll be anonymized. I don't really care what your laws say, and I don't really care what you think, or more likely "feel" about it since thinking really doesn't seem to enter into your world.

What needs to be required is that contact information for a domain work. If you need to reach me and send a message using the info on WHOIS, then I should get that message. If a registrar wants to verify that I can get such messages, then fine, that's quite legitimate. Of course, I may get a message from you and choose not to respond. Ignoring the likes of you would probably be kind of enjoyable actually. Tell me, how would you know the difference even with "accurate and verifiable" information anyway? What are you going to do, complain to your ISP or your mommy that I'm being mean and not paying attention? Besides which, in no way does the proper functioning of any of that require me telling the whole world who I am in advance and posting irrelevant information (like my home address) online for everybody to troll through.

Re:this should apply to all domains worldwide (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237965)

The use of services which anonymize or mask domain owners should be prohibited.

Fuck you, and everyone who thinks like you. If I want to be anonymized, then I'll be anonymized. I don't really care what your laws say, and I don't really care what you think, or more likely "feel" about it since thinking really doesn't seem to enter into your world.

What needs to be required is that contact information for a domain work. If you need to reach me and send a message using the info on WHOIS, then I should get that message. If a registrar wants to verify that I can get such messages, then fine, that's quite legitimate. Of course, I may get a message from you and choose not to respond. Ignoring the likes of you would probably be kind of enjoyable actually. Tell me, how would you know the difference even with "accurate and verifiable" information anyway? What are you going to do, complain to your ISP or your mommy that I'm being mean and not paying attention? Besides which, in no way does the proper functioning of any of that require me telling the whole world who I am in advance and posting irrelevant information (like my home address) online for everybody to troll through.

Name and Email contact is sufficient, posting of home address is completely inappropriate and may even be illegal as per EU law.

Re:this should apply to all domains worldwide (1)

whoever57 (658626) | about a month ago | (#47237501)

Every single domain should have accurate and verifiable information for the owner, administrative, and technical contacts. The use of services which anonymize or mask domain owners should be prohibited

That's a nice polemic statement, completely unsupported by any evidence supporting why making the information public is a good idea.

Re:this should apply to all domains worldwide (2)

astralagos (740055) | about a month ago | (#47238213)

Because domain generation is one of the most basic techniques used by malware authors and phishers to organize their attacks, as exemplified in the stone age by fast flux networks, Rock Phish, and Conficker, and in modern cases by Kelihos and most of the crap on Zeus networks. Because when a floor has to figure out what's going on with an address, the first thing they do is look up information on whois, which is already a poorly organized hot mess and the problem is further exacerbated by inaccurate info, outdated info, or flat out lies. We know that half the NICs are sleazeballs, but we don't often know which half, and so every incident takes a few hours of gumshoe work to validate that yes, it's some idiot high school again and not a real network threat. Because we're paying a palpable bandwidth task for blind scanning and spam coming down the network from bulletproof hosting providers and god knows what else, and it's not even interesting attacks anymore because it's not technically literate kids doing exciting things -- it's organized crime rings. And then, after you've spent 2 hours ripping through a dozen poorly designed databases to decide whether or not you can block that network, somebody from ICANN comes floating down on their cloud and suggests Qu'ils mangent de la brioche. I'm all for privacy, you want to be private, be private. You want to go ahead and have a blog, post on tumblr or something. But once you register a name, you're opting to enter an already public resource. You want to drive, you put on license plates. You want to have your own domain, put in public information.

Re:this should apply to all domains worldwide (1, Troll)

sjames (1099) | about a month ago | (#47238311)

And, of course, none of those sort of people would ever fib, right?

OTOH, anyone who says anything online has a good reason not to tell every kook and killer in the world where they live.

Go ahead, post your complete and accurate contact info right here. Do include phone number.

Re:this should apply to all domains worldwide (1)

ktetch-pirate (1850548) | about a month ago | (#47238409)

whaa work is so hard

And yeah, who eneds privacy because it makes some 'investigator's job hard. I'm pretty sure we can knock crime on the head if we throw privacy out of the window and abolish pesky things like 'search warrants'.
In fact, let's do just what you say in meatspace - lets lock down cities, and then send squads of cops door-to-door in every town. We'll clean up the 'crime' that's there, and there won't have to do any petty investigating. orangina's all around!

The issue is not fake domain info. The issue is legally acceptable information in the UK (pseudonym not used for the purpose of deception - all your 'reasons' involve deception), and then some 'verification' which doesn't mean 'trying to contact (because hot damn! when they did that, it worked) but means matching entry on their database, with entry on another database they've paid for (and if you're not in their paid database, then it's government ID NOW or else.

Nominet had my home address for 2 years. no problems. any legal requirement to contact me beyond what was on the contact page (which had email and phone) could be dealt with via the standard legal way (such as a simple norwich pharmacal order) or via the authorities asking nicely.

it's just like the license plate, Can you show me where I can look up your name and home address online, for free, with just your license plate? You can't? Oh. Why's that? Because anyone with a significant reason to know would have reason to involve an authority that could find out, eh? Amazing.

TL;dr - you're lazy, and you want to make things for everyone else worse, because it makes your job a little easier. How nice of you to decide that being able to relax at your job is more important than my desire not to be SWATed, because I discussed my run-in with convicted hacker Jeremy Hammond and annoyed his supporters by shattering their illusions (I've actually done that, and yes his supporters have actively pizza-bombed people who spoke against him last year)

Re:this should apply to all domains worldwide (1)

rtb61 (674572) | about a month ago | (#47238999)

Yet that domain name is just an entry in a database, pretty meaningless in reality and totally controlled by where an end user DNS points. You can see the day coming, with the end of Net Neutrality where major multi-national ISPs decide that all the domain name money is theirs and route all traffic to their DNS servers and unless you pay them, your domain name no longer exist, it will be in their EULA, that the end user most use the ISPs domain name servers, or pay extra as a result of the extra cost of using another private corporations DNS server. It would be fraudulent to point that DNS request to the wrong address but not fraudulent to claim it is currently unavailable (they are making it unavailable) try this other one instead.

Re:this should apply to all domains worldwide (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237849)

What a load of bullshit.

Re:this should apply to all domains worldwide (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47238003)

Contact information != Postal address.

There are plenty of perfectly legal reasons why I wouldn't want my address on the Internet.

Not that RFC hardliners like you would understand that...

Not required (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47237233)

I have neither a UK driving license (voluntarily surrendered some years ago) nor a valid passport - what am I to do, given that government issued photo ID is NOT compulsory here!

TFA's a bit long - can't find ref to passport! (1)

Zaiff Urgulbunger (591514) | about a month ago | (#47237323)

TFA is kind of long, so I will concede that on this one occasion, I may have merely skimmed it's content. However, as a gesture of good-will, I shall read the *next* TFA in it's entirety, *twice*.

Anyway, from my brief skimmage, I could find no mention of passports or driving licences. Does anyone know what the summary is referring to?

Re:TFA's a bit long - can't find ref to passport! (2)

ktetch-pirate (1850548) | about a month ago | (#47237477)

read the last link, Anyway, Nominet is demanding ID to 'validate' names, even though under UK law, pseudonyms not designed to deceive are legal for use, else they sieze the domains. They do this despite accepting the pseudnym and the legal right to use one in the UK, and the identity of the person in the case (me)
Basically, if you have a UK domain, and they can't 'verify' you in the big brother databases, you got to send them ID now.

There's a very good reason.... (1)

flightmaker (1844046) | about a month ago | (#47237947)

....for me not being able to go to a web site and use a vehicle number plate to look up the address of the jerk who cut me up in traffic today.

Similar reasons surely need to apply to domain registrations.

Re:There's a very good reason.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47238849)

Set up a shell company claiming to do parking enforcement.

Access to that database is then yours.

In the UK at least.

So ... (1)

cascadingstylesheet (140919) | about a month ago | (#47238573)

... everyone who is against this, is also against publishing the names and addresses of political donors, right?

Nomonet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47238699)

They will have their name changed by the people who favor their right to privacy to Nomonet, whether they see it happening or not. See Ya

This is going to be fun.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47240685)

To disclose personal information without the giver's permission or to change its use is a breach of the UK Data Protection Act. Given that their "it's a company" assessment does not need to track with reality, it's just a matter of time before they catch a live one and need to face the music. A classic example is the Stephen Fry who they herald as "first to make the switch" himself - his work is commercial, but the website date may be personal and as such subject to DPA.

Give it time, the digging has already started.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...