×

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!

RoadRunner Intercepting Domain Typos

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the following-in-the-footsteps-of-netsol dept.

The Internet 337

shaunco writes "Sometime around midnight on February 26th (at least for the SoCal users), TimeWarner's RoadRunner service started intercepting failed DNS requests, redirecting them to RoadRunner's own search and advertising platform. To see if this has been enabled in your area, try visiting {some random string}.com in your Web browser. This feature subverts user preferences set within browsers, which allow the user to select which search engine receives their typos and invalid domains. RoadRunner users can disable this function — or they can just use OpenDNS. Here is an example RoadRunner results page.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

337 comments

OpenDNS Guide (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561330)

or they can just use OpenDNS
But OpenDNS does the exact same thing [opendns.com]!

Re:OpenDNS Guide (4, Informative)

jagilbertvt (447707) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561370)

This has actually been going on for a few weeks now for New York area customers. However, there is an opt-out option that comes up on the page that comes up. I'm not quite sure how it tracks those opt-outs (by ip address perhaps?), as I didn't delve into it too deeply.

Re:OpenDNS Guide (3, Informative)

robogun (466062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561598)

I' pretty sure it opts out by IP addresses - none of my machines came up with that junk after I opted out on one of them.

Even in Firefox, all domains are intercepted and the search page is delivered if you just type the name (good or not)without http:/// [http] and hit enter. IE users won't notice this as IE already delivers MSN Search if you try that.

Re:OpenDNS Guide (5, Insightful)

mrbcs (737902) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561400)

Yes, but the difference is that YOU get control of how these are handled, not your ISP.

Re:OpenDNS Guide (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561898)

...except for that the article (even the summary) states that you can disable it there, too. Which makes your point rather...pointless, now doesn't it?

Of course since OpenDNS has the word "open" in it, I'm sure anyone who thinks that their tactics are no better than Time-Warner's in this case will mod this comment into oblivion. Typical Slashdot, predictable, boring, knee-jerk responses with a considerable lack of understanding of the real world.

Re:OpenDNS Guide (1)

EvanED (569694) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561908)

And, at least as the summary describes it (the link is broken), you get control from your ISP now: "RoadRunner users can disable this function."

Though I'd be a little surprised if OpenDNS didn't give you a way to disable the guide, I don't see anything on the page your parent linked that says you can.

Re:OpenDNS Guide (1)

Meneth (872868) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561452)

Which is why I run BIND [isc.org] myself.

Re:OpenDNS Guide (1, Interesting)

idontgno (624372) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561694)

And what's your upstream DNS provider? If it's Road Runner, I bet you'll get bogus A records returned, no matter what protocol you intend to use the resulting IP address with. Similarly with OpenDNS, as far as I can tell.

And I hope for your sake you're running a recent version of BIND. That thing is epic in terms of ancient (but now closed) remote exploit opportunities.

Re:OpenDNS Guide (4, Informative)

tomz16 (992375) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561930)

FAIL for failing to understand how DNS works... Your statement is only true if you are running a caching server. No reason why bind can't do its own lookup. You lose out on the cache benefits of a larger DNS server, but don't have to rely on anything other than the roots.

Actually, OpenDNS is even worse! (4, Interesting)

Anti-Trend (857000) | more than 6 years ago | (#22562022)

OpenDNS is actually substantially worse. At least Roadrunner is obvious about the fact that you're visiting their servers. With OpenDNS, it seemed they were actually proxying requests for well-known search engines that were *not* typo'd in order to grab stats. Try setting your DNS resolvers to OpenDNS, then dig (or 'nslookup' for you Windows folks) www.google.com. Do a whois on the resulting IPs, and guess who they're registered to... Google? Nope, OpenDNS! At least, last I checked -- that was also the last time I used OpenDNS.

And? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561364)

Verizon DSL does this too. I don't see how this is a story.

Re:And? (1, Funny)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561510)

Yup. I noticed Verizon doing this a couple months ago. It didn't even cross my mind to submit it as a newsworthy story, though.

Re:And? (3, Insightful)

nwf (25607) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561604)

Yea, I noticed this as well and also didn't think something so trivial was news worthy. Now I'd like it if they also re-directed typo-squatters domains as well. That would be a public service, especially anything in the .cm TLD.

Re:And? (1)

JustOK (667959) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561618)

...first they came for your mistyped web addresses and you said nothing...

Re:And? (2, Informative)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561688)

You're right. I didn't say anything at all. But I did change the DNS addresses on my machines so they ended in .42 instead of .12 like the help page said to do. Now I get "proper page couldn't be found" messages instead of a yahoo/verizon lookup failed page.

Re:And? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561810)

First they came and bastardized Pastor Martin Niemoller's quote and I said nothing...

New? (1)

ack154 (591432) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561380)

I believe they've been doing this for a little while now in my area. I've seen it at my place any my g/f's place. I disabled it already where I am. I was pretty surprised to see it, but instantly looked for a way to turn it off. I'm actually impressed they gave a way to disable it at all though.

DFW (1)

Hungus (585181) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561398)

I noticed this happening a couple of weeks ago in the DFW area at a few clients houses and then my own. Obviously I disabled it immediately but it is still very annoying to say the least.

And this is new? (1)

wiredog (43288) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561408)

Don't most ISPs in the US do this?

Re:And this is new? (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561520)

Not to my knowledge. This is definitely a first for RoadRunner; I've been with them for several years now, and haven't seen anything like this.

Re:And this is new? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561606)

Zoomtown in Cincinnati has been doing this for over a year. It's not like this is news. At all.

Re:And this is new? (1)

Gewalt (1200451) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561756)

Yes, every major ISP in the us either has it, or is in the process of rolling it out.

The technically illiterate do indeed see it as a benefit, and its a welcome feature by the masses.

The technically literate of us know how to opt out of the feature, and it's not a problem by any means at all. It's if they start leaving us no way to opt out that I'll get pissed. But then there's always OpenDNS, which so far, noone needs, but one day we might.

Re:And this is new? (1)

omeomi (675045) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561770)

No, Comcast doesn't.

Just noticed that somebody has already registered jkshdfkljh23sadf.com. Way to go Mr. Private, Registration...

Re:And this is new? (1)

_Hiro_ (151911) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561942)

Awww, you beat me.

It could be worse... He could've used asdf.com as an example...

Re:What's next? (2, Informative)

perdue (1153995) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561680)

http://ww23.rr.com/index.php?origURL=http://www.google.com

Lest anyone think this demonstrates that Road Runner is intentionally blocking Google, the trick here is that you can arbitrarily edit the string after ?origURL= to produce a page describing any website couldn't be found.

Doesn't happen on Bright House. (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561414)

In case any Bright House RoadRunner customers were wondering -- this doesn't happen on Bright House (at least in the Tampa Bay area) (yet?). Can any other Bright House customers report?

Been at least a month (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561416)

I noticed that they were doing it. Was going to mention it to my local LUG, but /. beat me to it -- procrastination, what can I say.

Squatting www.jkshdfkljh23sadf.com (5, Funny)

daveywest (937112) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561420)

Seems like I should be registering this and pointing it to my porn/phishing site right now.

Re:Squatting www.jkshdfkljh23sadf.com (1)

garett_spencley (193892) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561548)

You inspired me to try a few out of curiosity. Not surprisingly asdf.com as well as asdfg.com and asdfgh.com are all registered.

I actually laughed when one of them served an ad titled "Learn how to type".

Re:Squatting www.jkshdfkljh23sadf.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561622)

It's too late. Someone already has it on GoDaddy.com. Not that anyone is surprised.

Re:Squatting www.jkshdfkljh23sadf.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561798)

too late...it's been GoDaddy'ed

Too late (1)

LordEd (840443) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561896)

Somebody has already registered:

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: JKSHDFKLJH23SADF.COM
Created on: 26-Feb-08
Expires on: 26-Feb-09
Last Updated on: 26-Feb-08

I KNEW IT! (0, Offtopic)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561422)

I knew when I first saw a road runner branded "typo ad page" that they were doing it. In fact I actually thought "I'm gonna read about this one on slashdot!" First of all the date is all wrong. They've been doing it for over a week in Wisconsin. Secondly, I'll do you one better. Any time a combined bittorrent upload of mine exceeds 30 KBPS, my modem mysteriously jams up. And also I've done over 100 GB of torrent traffic up and down. Mostly Knoppix and other legal stuff but not all. And about 2 months ago my download speed became capped at about 1500 kbps instead of the new 8000 or whatever they just upped it to. If I use a multi-source downloader like leechget, I can get the full 850 kBps from a good server. Also even at like 2 AM it's the exact same limit so it's not just traffic. So they seem to be throttling me on purpose. That's right, I'm breaking that story right here right now. In fact I've been meaning to call them about it...brb

Re:I KNEW IT! (1)

gmack (197796) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561616)

Any time a combined bittorrent upload of mine exceeds 30 KBPS, my modem mysteriously jams up.

Check your airflow.. it's probably overheating. Try putting an external fan blowing into the air vents and see if it stops doing that.

My ISP does this too (4, Insightful)

Galaga88 (148206) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561440)

My local ISP (Insight in Evansville, Indiana) does the same thing. Even worse, when you 'opt-out' of their URL redirection, they instead redirect you to a fake IE error page. Slimy.

Re:My ISP does this too (3, Interesting)

ivanmarsh (634711) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561832)

My Charter service does the same thing. Leave it to a bunch of marketing nimrods to disable a troubleshooting tool so you can't tell the difference between a page not found, site not found or DNS error.

So... I simply blacklisted Charter's redirection site in my firewall and proxy server.

This would be fine... (2, Insightful)

Oxy the moron (770724) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561460)

... if it were opt-in and not opt-out. I would like to think that the majority of Internet users who don't use Slashdot have no idea about what actually happens when you type in www.dlibert.com, for example.

Send an e-mail to your subscribers and let them enable the feature if they so desire, but don't force it on your userbase.

Interception, first down! (3, Interesting)

themushroom (197365) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561472)

Roadrunner's not-found page seems roughly as useful as the default MSN Search page that IE puts up automatically if a page can't be found. Which is to say, not very.

But it's still nowhere near as worthwhile as the "what you want, when you want it" domain squatter pages where most of the links are porn and ads. Catch up, Roadrunner!!

ATT does it as well (2, Interesting)

B00yah (213676) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561480)

They've been doing it for about a year. i always thought it was fairly shady, but they rationalized it by saying other ISPs were doing it as well.

Re:ATT does it as well (1)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561580)

They've been doing it for about a year. i always thought it was fairly shady, but they rationalized it by saying other ISPs were doing it as well.
This is the oldest excuse in the book, so much so that probably every mother on Earth has a response to it (adjusted for language/culture where appropriate): "If everyone else jumped off a bridge, would you?".

Re:ATT does it as well (1)

B00yah (213676) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561792)

"If everyone else jumped off a bridge, would you?".

in the corporate world? Ya, for sure. At least, that's what i've seen, and I've been through a few large isps.

Re:ATT does it as well (1)

CSMatt (1175471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22562066)

Considering that much of the joy I get in life is from the companionship of others, then yes.

Would you know the difference? (3, Funny)

Otter (3800) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561498)

To see if this has been enabled in your area, try visiting www.jkshdfkljh23sadf.com (or something else random) in your web browser.

Are there failed DNS requests any more? I'd thought every combination of characters had its own ad farm by now. If the last few unused ones now also direct to some random ads, I doubt I'd even notice.

Who clicks on those things, anyway? You land on ebaaaaaay.com when your 'a' key sticks and think "Yes, I do want a beautiful Russian bride!"?

Even happening with Lynx (1)

zerobeat (628744) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561522)

Just tried it in West Hollywood area using lynx as the browser. Even then it is getting diverted to their page. Pretty sneaky.

Re:Even happening with Lynx (5, Funny)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561640)

Just tried it in West Hollywood area using lynx as the browser. Even then it is getting diverted to their page. Pretty sneaky.
... you don't really understand how this whole DNS lookup thing works do you?

Re:Even happening with Lynx (2, Informative)

TheCRAIGGERS (909877) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561666)

Why would you think Lynx would be immune to this? Lynx requests 'www.slfjiuhsf.com' and gets data back.

Verizon FIOS does the same in No VA (3, Informative)

schwit1 (797399) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561540)

Re:Verizon FIOS does the same in No VA (1)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561706)

They just started doing it in Pittsburgh as well. The first time I noticed it was about a week ago, but I have been travelling a lot so it could have changed a few weeks ago.

Re:Verizon FIOS does the same in No VA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561796)

Verizon does this in southwest Ohio as well.

Who uses their own ISP's DNS servers? (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561624)

ISP DNS servers are notoriously sucky, or polluted with crap. Find an open one out there at a serious network provider and just use that.

Re:Who uses their own ISP's DNS servers? (1)

EVil Lawyer (947367) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561778)

Great, thanks for the advice, but how about a little help? Any tips on where to find one or how to start using one if you're, say, not using Linux?

Re:Who uses their own ISP's DNS servers? (1)

EvanED (569694) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561978)

Okay, great. So now I have to use a half-DHCP-configured, half-statically-configured setup?

I don't even know if that's possible to set up under Windows; I certainly don't know how to do it. I think it's more likely to be possible in Linux, but I still don't know how to do it.

Don't care, I have my own DNS server (2, Interesting)

Ars Dilbert (852117) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561642)

My DNS server queries root servers directly, so any poisoning by an ISP would not affect my home network.

The Site Finder stunt NetSol/Verisign pulled a few years ago, that was done on the root servers, wasn't it? That was a lot more disruptive than an ISP creating a catch-all DNS zone on their little DNS boxes.

In the grand scheme of things (1)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561644)

Can someone explain why I should care? It seems wrong. But not enough to get worked up about. No redirection from the correct page (typo was my fault), just wasting my time waiting for the content to download so that I know I typed a address wrong. I'd rather they didn't do it, but this seems the least of my worries.

Didn't a registrar do this? (1)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561650)

Wasn't there a registrar (I want to say Network Solutions) that was doing the same thing, only it was regardless of whatever connection you were using?

Re:Didn't a registrar do this? (4, Informative)

Todd Knarr (15451) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561972)

There was. What TW's doing is more pernicious, though. When NetSol was doing it, they were returning the A records directly from their first-level nameservers. BIND's no-delegation option can deal with that, because those first-level nameservers aren't supposed to be returning A records and BIND can translate those response into proper NX responses. With TW, since their DNS servers are supposed to be returning A records, there's no way to tell whether a particular affirmative response is valid or invalid. The only way to fix the problem is to cut TW's servers out of the loop entirely. All well and good, until of course TW either starts blocking all traffic to port 53 that's not to their DNS servers (like they do with outbound to port 25 now) or silently redirecting all DNS queries to their servers. Note that both of these are trivial, my own firewall has (commented-out) rules for both and neither takes more than about 3 lines.

So? (0, Troll)

Stealth Dave (189726) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561654)

I realize that Time Warner Cable is a Big Evil Corporation(TM), but what's the big deal here? So you type in a domain that does not exist and they give you search results based on that domain. "But they're serving ads, those money-grubbing evil-doers!" Guess what: search engines serve ads! It's true! But let's say you don't want your DNS server sending you ads. That's a reasonable request, since you're already paying for the service. I guess you can just turn them off like the post suggests!

I don't think that the sky is falling just yet on this one.

- Stealth Dave

Re:So? (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561782)

well you see, the way the whole thing was designed was that when a client sends out a DNS query, and no DNS server can resolve it, the query is supposed to fail. Simply breaking this design, especially for no good reason is not a good thing.

Re:So? (5, Informative)

Todd Knarr (15451) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561894)

The problem here is that what TW is doing breaks DNS. By the RFCs, when I try to resolve a name that doesn't exist, I'm supposed to get an NX "record does not exist" result. What I get instead is an affirmative A record "name exists at this address" response. What happens at the browser level is irrelevant, TW's DNS system has already lied about the state of the DNS records associated with a given domain. This badly breaks a lot of things that aren't browsers that use HTTP and depend on correct NX responses to tell them when the server they're trying to talk to doesn't exist.

As long as TW doesn't block direct use of non-TW DNS servers this can be worked around. If they start blocking that access, or redirecting all DNS traffic to their servers, then we've got a major problem on our hands.

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561938)

The *PROBLEM* is that some software expects to get 'cant find' instead of a 'real address'. Yes this works nicely in a browser. However for other software it is not as good.

They just went and did it. Then are going to see what the backlash is, if its not that bad then leave it. Not exactly a real service addition. Just a way for them to rake in a little extra cash. They are not helping their customers. They are helping themselves. Which is fine. But puts them in a bad position if another network comes along and could replace them. They are fungable thing. The only have a 'lock' for now as they are usually 1 of 2 players in a market.

The rr I use has left their network at '6MB' downloads as that is the highest the other provider gives (AT&T). Even though they have the hardware in place for 20MB downloads. There is no business case for them to provide better service.

I think I liked it better when I had a choice of 20 ISPs instead of 2.

Yet another one (3, Informative)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561672)

I use Cavalier Telephone DSL [cavtel.net] and they've been doing this for years. I called them about it and they suggested that I use alternate DNS servers. Nobody has complained, nobody even cares. IMHO, this is another network neutrality-type issue. Followed the protocols, provide access - don't reroute/intercept/redirect me. (FYI to anyone else using them - they monitor your BitTorrent downloads too.)

Re:Yet another one (1)

LMacG (118321) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561858)

They "monitor" my BT downloads in what way? I had a full-season of Torchwood long before BBC-A decided to show it over here, and some other titles which shall remain unspecified. Never had a problem with speed, never had the CavTel goons knocking on my door . . .

Re:Yet another one (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561924)

I had my service turned-off by them, and when I called, they told me it was because I downloaded a TV show over P2P. They accurately told me the file name that I downloaded and the date that I did it. F'n scary. It's especially frustrating because I am Mr. Anti-Piracy -- but I was watching a series and missed an episode and I didn't want to fall behind...

Just an Idea (0, Flamebait)

TheNinjaroach (878876) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561684)

Don't attempt reaching domain names that don't exist. Who cares where they take you when you won't end up at your intended destination anyways?

Just use openDNS for security. (1)

killmofasta (460565) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561692)

I just switched over to openDNS.
I somehow cannot access any sites anymore,
that I suspected had very bad content!
( if I want to test my security, I have to switch back to comcast's unsecure DNSs )

Life with openDNS is great, and fast and secure.
Wish they would get on with having servers in more areas, but
they are connected right to the Level3 backbone.

and openDNSs search feature isnt half bad.
( I know, I used to hit a lot of squatters ).

HAHAHA (5, Informative)

GodCandy (1132301) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561704)

How ironic... someone registered www.jkshdfkljh23sadf.com as a parked domain. Wow these ppl need help.

Old (here, anyway) (1)

Cooldrew (1184399) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561718)

It's been like this in the Capital Region of NY for a month or so. Probably started beginning of january, but don't quote me on that.

Re:Old (here, anyway) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22562058)

It's been going on in NY Capital Region for since at least Christmas.

Verizon Fios does it too apparently... (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561750)

I never quite realized it until now though. Its been happening lately and now i know what it is.

Charter's doing it too (2, Informative)

Einer2 (665985) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561752)

As far as I can tell, it started in Los Angeles sometime in the last few weeks.

earthlink does this with GOOD URLs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561760)

If I have javascript** on and hit too many links too fast,(I am a news junky, not talking about porn either) setting up a set of tabs for reading, they won't "find" most of the URLs even though they are legitimate, they redirect you to their own stupid search page, tell you they "can't find" the URL, and I mean stupid stuff like they can't "find" drudge report? Stuff like that. Seriously bogus. And to make it worse, they *disable* the back button so you can't go back and do it again, and they add junk characters to the original URL, while removing most of the finer points of the addy at the same time, so you can't copy and paste the original URL you wanted to go to in the first place.

**javascript is just teh evile, hates it, but most websites out there seem to require it now, that and the fellow net demon from hell, *flash*. And leaving scripting on means your page downloads take 10 times longer, maybe not so noticeable with broadband, but on dialup (all I can get) I am seeing pages that never finish downloading after letting them run for actual multiple minutes. It's just getting terrible out there with web page bloat. And "no script" doesn't matter when you have to go ahead and whitelist most of the pages out there you want to see anyway, waste of time. And you have to have javascript ON to run flashblock! It never ends!

RFCs (1)

Dogun (7502) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561838)

You know, any and all future network protocol RFCs should mandate the blacklisting of networks that choose not to comply.

Verizon FiOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22561846)

Has been doing this for some time now too. It's bloody irritating because you don't get the chance to edit the typo in the URL once Verizon's wanky screen comes up.

Google should have a DNS (1)

Jafafa Hots (580169) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561862)

Everyone just uses Google's results anyway - but with Google's resources, they could have the snappiest, speediest DNS... plus they could probably come up with some cool innovation that I can't even imagine right now that would make their pages returned from domain typos worth getting. I dunno, something so cool that we'd be mistyping domain names on purpose.

As it is, I changed to openDNS when Verizon pulled this crap, also because Verizon wasn't returning some blog or whatever (can't remember)... but even OpenDNS' page bugs the hell out of me. Used to be firefox just returned Google's "I Feel Lucky" result, so you could type in just "slashdot" for example. Fucking Verizon (and OpenDNS) ruined that, I'm not sure how Verizon managed to stop Firefox from default to google, or if it was Verizon doing that.

Call and complain (1)

oyenstikker (536040) | more than 6 years ago | (#22561980)

I spent about half an hour on the phone with them to complain when I first noticed this last week. Nobody that they let us unimportant residential customers talk to even knew what a DNS server was, but the rep talked with me until she got enough down on paper that she could use to file a complaint to the higher-ups. Hopefully if enough people do this, they will stop.

Oh, wait, they have a government granted monopoly. My only alternatives are slow and really slow.

Call and complain to your elected representatives.

anyone else notice the search engine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22562014)

powered by yahoo. that's a mistake right away. if they wanted a better suggestion, they should use google

There's no ethical reason to do this (1)

hellfire (86129) | more than 6 years ago | (#22562082)

When I type in a domain, I recognize if I made a typo and went to the wrong page or not. I recognize if it's one of those ad domains and then go back and type it right, or do a google search if in case I didn't know the proper spelling or simply didn't know the right address.

But what does the average user do? Do they properly question the website they are on? Do stop and go back and try another site? Not all of them. Many will start clicking on these links, waste time, and be led in circles. They might end up on the website that they want to go, but more likely they might end up on a website that will display too many ads, sell them something at an overpriced rate, or give them spyware or a virus. All of course in milking us in the name of making more money. These are not services that give consumers any kind of benefit. People who serve ads all know it's about bombarding the average user, giving them headaches, and hoping a few n00bs click on the links and buy something they shouldn't buy. It's complete bullshit and it has to stop.

Business used to mean giving the customer what they wanted. I don't want a headache!
Load More 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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...