{OT} VeriSign *WORSE* than spam ?

[status]

http://www.pcworld.com/resource/printable/article/0,aid,112572,00.asp

<SNIP>
New Procedure: In particular, e-mail messages sent to addresses at
nonexistent Internet domains will be delivered to VeriSign's Site
Finder servers instead, according to Lance Cottrell, president and
founder of Anonymizer, a provider of anonymous Web surfing and online
privacy protection products.

In the past, those messages would not have left the systems of the
user's ISP before being marked as undeliverable and returned to the
user. VeriSign could potentially harvest these messages and their
contents, Cottrell says.

Internet users should also be concerned about VeriSign collecting
information about surfing patterns from requests for domains, he says.
Such information would give VeriSign a wealth of free market research,
Cottrell adds.
<SNIP>

I apologize for the bad cut & paste but thought this was interesting
enough to post here.

 

[H-Man]

http://www.pcworld.com/resource/printable/article/0,aid,112572,00.asp

<SNIP>
New Procedure: In particular, e-mail messages sent to addresses at
nonexistent Internet domains will be delivered to VeriSign's Site
Finder servers instead, according to Lance Cottrell, president and
founder of Anonymizer, a provider of anonymous Web surfing and online
privacy protection products.

In the past, those messages would not have left the systems of the
user's ISP before being marked as undeliverable and returned to the
user. VeriSign could potentially harvest these messages and their
contents, Cottrell says.

Internet users should also be concerned about VeriSign collecting
information about surfing patterns from requests for domains, he says.
Such information would give VeriSign a wealth of free market research,
Cottrell adds.
<SNIP>

I apologize for the bad cut & paste but thought this was interesting
enough to post here.

Further to this, after having renewed our company domain, the number of SPAM
messages to the admin account, which was especially set up for VeriSign, and
they were the only ones ever given this email address, has increased from
none, to 20-30 per day. Bad, bad VeriSign!
HK

 

[Mel]

http://www.pcworld.com/resource/printable/article/0,aid,112572,00.asp

<SNIP>
New Procedure: In particular, e-mail messages sent to addresses at
nonexistent Internet domains will be delivered to VeriSign's Site
Finder servers instead, according to Lance Cottrell, president and
founder of Anonymizer, a provider of anonymous Web surfing and online
privacy protection products.

Theres more about that here

http://theregister.co.uk/content/6/32946.html

and here
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/32873.html


and a small petition here

http://www.petitiononline.com/verisign/petition.html

 

[Bruce]

Theres more about that here
http://theregister.co.uk/content/6/32946.html
and here
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/32873.html
and a small petition here
http://www.petitiononline.com/verisign/petition.html

I had registered a new domain a few days ago and while waiting
for dns to propagate kept wondering why I was being directed to
a verisign site when my registrar and dns servers have nothing to
do with verisign.

I got hijacked by a dns wildcard.
Looks like Verisign and network solutions are on many black lists now.
Mine included !

Give this a read. Another example of corporate greed putting
it's fingers where they don't belong. Thanks for the info on this one.
I suggest that everybody cast a vote in the petition above.

Bruce

 

[Susan Bugher]

http://www.theregister.com/content/6/33212.html

<quote>
VeriSign has pulled its controversial SiteFinder application after ICANN
demanded in a formal statement and letter that the company shut it down
by Saturday or face the consequences.
</quote>

Susan