] The giant recorder of Web addresses sure sparked a fire
] when it redirected site-not-found messages to its own
] search engine. It's a bum rap.

Businessweek doesn't get it. This guy oversimplifies the objections to the service, explains away his oversimiplification, and then claims that sitefinder should be allowed. This is what is known as a straw man arguement. Read the IAB's comments on the servie. Read verisign's technical response. Even Verisign hasn't managed to provide a coherent explanation of how services other then HTTP and SMTP are supposed to handle this change. If you think the internet is made up of SMTP, HTTP, Ping, and Traceroute then you don't understand the internet, and therefore you don't know what you're talking about.

BW Online | October 7, 2003 | Verisign Didn't Deserve This Spanking

] This response will address the IAB commentary, using
] observed operational data to put the issues into context.

Verisign links the question about services OTHER then HTTP/SMTP to their website about sitefinder. Why not a direct link to the information they are apparently referencing? Why not paraphrase? The reasons are obvious. Verisign recommends that impacted parties replace DNS queries with WHOIS lookups. This is an extremely stupid idea. Verisign knows that whois is not designed to handle the load, but I'll bet they figure no one will actually do this. Alternately, the offer that all software be modified to cross check DNS replies against a wildcard lookup. They claim these recommendations are in keeping with Internet standards.

Everytime Verisign says there are no stability problems with the Internet I imagine the Iraqi information minister. If there is no stability problem, then why do you need to provide all this technical information about how people can adapt their already deployed technology to interoperate with your change??

VeriSign Responds to IAB Site Finder Commentary

] In his 2 1/2 years in office, Attorney General John
] Ashcroft has earned himself a remarkable distinction as
] the Torquemada of American law. Tomas de Torquemada was
] the 15th century Dominican friar who became the grand
] inquisitor of the Spanish Inquisition. He was largely
] responsible for its methods, including torture and the
] burning of heretics - Muslims in particular.

DenverPost.com - Walter Cronkite on the DOJ

] The "denial of service" bug meant the port's web service
] was not accessible to provide crucial data for shipping
] pilots, mooring companies and support firms responsible
] for helping ships to navigate in and out of the harbour,
] placing shipping at risk.

So, let me get this straight. Houston has computers associated with the navigation of ships in their harbor connected to the internet?

Guardian Unlimited | Online | Hacker attack left port in chaos

] Four Internet pioneers discuss the sorry state of online
] communication today. The consensus: It's a real mess.

Farber, Templeton, Crocker, and Nielson on Spam.

I wrote my boss today and told him that I think Challenge Response is the future. Vipul's Razor is pretty cool and it might work out, but baring that, its going to be CR.

CR is not annoying. You only need to authenticate with someone once, and only when you first email them, and only when you email them first.
CR can be expanded to operate as a hash cash system when the spammers adapt to it.
As people only need to authenticate if they aren't already whitelisted, there is no COST associated with CR for mailing list operators, dotcom companies, and other legitimate bulk emailers.
CR never prevents an important legitimate message from reaching its destination.
CR kills spam dead. Spam can ultimately be completely prevented in a CR system.

Its just a matter of time. I setup a CR system... Setup more and more ways to populate the whitelist information. Meet people in person? Get their email from their pda via IR and then whitelist them... Share whitelist information with a network of friends... Eventually when the spammers start getting into the whitelists, make the challenge require a math problem be solved. Initially this will look like a PGP block in your email that you will have to cut and paste into a webpage. You will only have to do this once to talk to someone, and only if you've never talked to them before, and only if you initiate the conversation. Eventually your email client will handle it in the background... THAT is the moment where everything will be fixed. The process of authenticating you will BLEND back into the background and the internet will SEEM exactly as it is now, except there will be no spam.

THAT is the future of email and that is how we are going to get there. Go write perl.

Salon.com Technology | E-mail is broken

] Should we blame the teenager? Sure, we can point the
] finger at him and say, 'Bad boy!' and slap him for it. Will that
] actually fix anything? No. The next geeky kid frustrated about not
] getting a date on Saturday night will come along and do the same thing
] without really understanding the consequences. So either we should make
] it a law that all geeks have dates -- I'd have supported such a law when I
] was a teenager -- or the blame is really on the companies who sell and
] install the systems that are quite that fragile."

Linus is in a position to say things directly that some of us cannot be trusted to say objectively.

[IP] Torvalds: geeky kids need dates [risks] Risks Digest 22.92

] VeriSign (Quote, Chart) says it will hold the Internet
] Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) "fully
] accountable" for its actions in forcing the .com and .net
] registrar to close its controversial Site Finder service.

In addition, Verisign is now making empty threats.

VeriSign Vows to Hold ICANN Accountable for Actions

] This is a significant test for the entire community
] because if the community can't find a way to introduce
] new services while reaching a resolution on technical
] matters that might arise, then the Internet
] infrastructure will never improve. It's tantamount to
] saying that the Internet world is flat and therefore
] there is no need for further exploration.

Look asshole, if you were interested in reaching resolution on the technical matters that might arise, you would have proposed your change to the community rather then making a unilateral decision. You would have pre-announced a date for the cutover so that people would be prepared to make any changes that they needed to make beforehand. The only people who are buying into your bullshit are people who own stock in your company and have a vested interest in beleiving in you. The rest of us are simply more and more sure that we are never going to do business with you for any reason. The rest of us aren't your shareholders. We're your customers. And you can rest assured that we are quite capable of continuing to deploy innovative services on the Internet without you.

Tell me why I should do business with a company that was not just forced to settle in a fraudulent marketing scheme, but also made significant, unannounced changes in a critical infrastructure service in violation of your contract without prior notification? Your business is about TRUST, and I'd be CRAZY to TRUST you after pulling a stunt like this!

Innovation and the Internet | Verisign Speaks to the technical community

] Here's the story Arnold doesn't want you to hear. The
] biggest single threat to Ken Lay and the electricity
] lords is a private lawsuit filed last year under
] California's unique Civil Code provision 17200, the
] "Unfair Business Practices Act." This litigation,
] heading to trial now in Los Angeles, would make the power
] companies return the $9 billion they filched from
] California electricity and gas customers.
]
] It takes real cojones to bring such a suit. Who's the
] plaintiff taking on the bad guys? Cruz Bustamante,
] Lieutenant Governor and reluctant leading candidate
] against Schwarzenegger.
]
] Now follow the action. One month after Cruz brings suit,
] Enron's Lay calls an emergency secret meeting in L.A. of
] his political buck-buddies, including Arnold. Their
] plan, to undercut Davis (according to Enron memos) and
] "solve" the energy crisis -- that is, make the Bustamante
] legal threat go away.

Juicy Arnold conspiracy theory!

(As interesting and plausable as this sounds, keep in mind that the sources for this stuff are hard core left wing. They are also arguing that Congress should pass a Constitutional Amendment in response to the Do-Not-Call List case which says that the first amendment does not apply to corporations. (I guess these people have forgotten that their websites are corporate entities which would also loose first amendment protections under such an amendment. I'm sure they'll happily clarify that "No, no, what we really mean is that we don't want the first amendment to apply to people that we don't like, particularily rich people, because they are bad. We still think it should apply to US and other people that we do agree with.") None of this ads up to them being wrong about Arnold. They might be right about Arnold. But I'll take it with a grain of salt until someone who isn't a raving lunatic decides to back the story.)

Arnold Unplugged - It's hasta la vista to $9 billion if the Governator is selected

] The Georgia Tech Information Security Center (GTISC)
] Distinguished Lecture Series will host Dr. Martin Hellman
] of Stanford University on Thursday, October 9, 2003 at
] 3:00PM, with a reception at 2:30PM prior to the lecture.

Georgia Institute of Technology :: Event