[dns-operations] shunning malware-hosting registrars

[Paul Vixie]

Carsten Schiefner wrote:
> Daniel -
>
> Mark Jeftovic of easyDNS has contributed here already.
>
> Additionally to what he and others have written, you may also want to
> read up his topical blog postings at:
>
> http://blog.easydns.org/2010/11/27/first-they-came-for-the-file-sharing-domains/
>
> http://blog.easydns.org/2013/10/08/whatever-happened-to-due-process/
> http://blog.easydns.org/2014/01/10/nabp-to-registrars-you-must-takedown-and-seize-any-domain-we-tell-you-to/
>
>
> Any such action you suggest would be a perfectly pointed shot into the
> foot wrt. the Registry/Registrar/DNS-in-general businesses' demand for
> due legal process and course of action.

what i'm specifically hoping for is total transparency. i consider whois
privacy to be a blight on internet cohesiveness -- noone who holds a
unique internet identifier should be able to hide behind their lawyer's
contact details or their registar's contact details -- the internet
social contract that i remember agreeing to is, if you want me to
respect your allocations, then you will use them responsibly.

but it's not just registrants i worry about. we've seen a handful of
borderline-to-really bad registrars over the years, who are able to
pollute the "internet commons" with malevolent and criminal waste for
years at a time until icann or the courts finally have enough evidence
to put them out of business. if every domain's registrar were reliably
determinable at scale, then after blackholing the 10,000th or so domain
from a single registrar, many of us might decide that our best interests
lay in blackholing all future domains from that registrar.

"first they came for the XYZ, and i said nothing because i wasn't XYZ,
etc" is the wrong way to think about this.

"your business model requires externalizing your costs onto the larger
economy/environment, thus i refuse to do business with you" is much
closer to where we're all living and working at this moment.

vixie