In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], william(
at)elan.net writes:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Joe Maimon wrote:
Thus justifying those who load their NS and corresponding NS's A records
with nice long TTL
Although this wasn't a problem in this case (hijacker did not appear to
have been interested in
On 17 Jan 2005, at 13:08, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
The suggestion that someone made the other day -- that the TTL on zones
be ramped up gradually by the registries after creation or transfer --
is, I think, a good one.
Records in the control of the registry are the NS records in the parent
zone
At 13:54 -0500 1/17/05, Joe Abley wrote:
So the TTLs of records in the registry-operated zones will likely have no
impact on how long NS records for delegated zones remain in caches.
If panix (or anybody else) wants to increase the time that their NS records
stay in caches, the way to do it is to
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], william(
at)elan.net writes:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Joe Maimon wrote:
Thus justifying those who load their NS and corresponding NS's A records
with nice long TTL
Although this wasn't a problem in this case (hijacker did not
Since folks have been working on this for hours, and according to
posts on NANOG, both MelbourneIT and Verisign refuse to do anything
for days or weeks, would it be a good time to take drastic action?
Think of what we'd do about a larger ISP, or the Well, or really any
serious financial target.
-
From: William Allen Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: nanog@merit.edu
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 12:38 AM
Subject: Re: panix.com hijacked (VeriSign refuses to help)
Since folks have been working on this for hours, and according to
posts on NANOG, both MelbourneIT and Verisign refuse to do
- Original Message -
From: Alexei Roudnev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: William Allen Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; nanog@merit.edu
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 4:07 AM
Subject: Re: panix.com hijacked (VeriSign refuses to help)
I addition, there is a good rule for such situations:
- first
Hi!
So let's see.. the users will see this when they log into shell.panix.net
(since shell.panix.com is borked).. Somehow, that doesn't seem to help much..
and the hijackers could be, potentially, running a box pretending to be
shell.panix.com, gathering userids and passwds :(
Or put up a pop
Of
Petra Zeidler
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 6:28 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: seed resolvers? Re: panix.com hijacked (VeriSign refuses to help)
Hi,
Thus wrote Alexei Roudnev ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
What happen if someone stole 'aol.com'domain tomorrow? Or
'microsoft.com'?
How much damage
Oki all,
Its dawn in Maine, the caffine delivery system has only just started,
but I'll comment on the overnight.
You're welcome [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you'll send me the cell phone number
for the MIT managment I will call wearing my registrar hat and inform
whoever I end up speaking with that
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine wrote:
One could almost think this hijack was timed to the release of the ICANN
Requests Public Comments on Experiences with Inter-Registrar Transfer
Policy from Jan 12:
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-12jan05.htm
I addition, there is a good rule for such situations:
- first, return everything to _previous_ state;
- having it fixed in previous state, allow time for laywers, disputes
and
so
on to resolve a problem.
agreed. but then proverbially, common sense isn't.
What happen if someone
To: Mark Jeftovic [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: Registrars Constituency [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [registrars] Re: panix.com hijacked
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: [EMAIL
Is there anything that us folks out in the peanut gallery can
do to help, other than locally serving the panix.net zone
for panix.com?
--
-=[L]=-
On 16.01 10:25, Lou Katz wrote:
Is there anything that us folks out in the peanut gallery can
do to help, other than locally serving the panix.net zone
for panix.com?
Avoid being caught by an IPR lawyer while helping; ;-)
Then organise operators to insert operational clue
into the
Don't panic ?
;)
Lou Katz wrote:
Is there anything that us folks out in the peanut gallery can
do to help, other than locally serving the panix.net zone
for panix.com?
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 07:21:55PM +0100, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
On 16.01 12:46, William Allen Simpson wrote:
--- Forwarded Message
From: Ross Wm. Rader [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't see what you are looking at - .net and .com point to the same
place with no indication of
On 16 Jan 2005 at 10:25, Lou Katz wrote:
Is there anything that us folks out in the peanut gallery can
do to help, other than locally serving the panix.net zone
for panix.com?
--
-=[L]=-
actually this is amazingly helpful. in fact
encouraging more ISPs to do the same thing is, IMHO,
Andrew Brown wrote:
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 07:21:55PM +0100, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
On 16.01 12:46, William Allen Simpson wrote:
--- Forwarded Message
From: Ross Wm. Rader [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't see what you are looking at - .net and .com point to the same
place with no
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
What happen if someone stole 'aol.com'domain tomorrow? Or 'microsoft.com'?
How much damage will be done until this sleeping behemots wake up, set up a
meeting (in Tuesday I believe - because Monday is a holiday), make any
decision, open a toicket,
actually godaddy has been quite reponsive for me @ 3am before.
Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine wrote:
Howdy Perry,
Alexis Rosen of Panix was on the phone earlier today with the company
attorney for melbourneit -- reputedly he was informed that even if the
police called, they would not do
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Joe Maimon wrote:
Thus justifying those who load their NS and corresponding NS's A records
with nice long TTL
Although this wasn't a problem in this case (hijacker did not appear to
have been interested in controlling dns since it points to default domain
registration
panix.com has apparently been hijacked. It's now associated with a
different registrar -- melbourneit instead of dotster -- and a
different owner. Can anyone suggest appropriate people to contact to
try to get this straightened out?
--Prof. Steven M. Bellovin,
Once upon a time, Steven M. Bellovin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
panix.com has apparently been hijacked. It's now associated with a
different registrar -- melbourneit instead of dotster -- and a
different owner. Can anyone suggest appropriate people to contact to
try to get this straightened
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Steven M. Bellovin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
panix.com has apparently been hijacked. It's now associated with a
different registrar -- melbourneit instead of dotster -- and a
different owner. Can anyone suggest appropriate people
Mark Jeftovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Once upon a time, Steven M. Bellovin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
panix.com has apparently been hijacked. It's now associated with a
different registrar -- melbourneit instead of dotster -- and a
different owner. Can anyone suggest appropriate people
On Sat, Jan 15, 2005 at 10:27:31PM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
panix.com has apparently been hijacked. It's now associated with a
different registrar -- melbourneit instead of dotster -- and a
different owner. Can anyone suggest appropriate people to contact to
try to get this
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, Mark Jeftovic wrote:
Once upon a time, Steven M. Bellovin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
panix.com has apparently been hijacked. It's now associated with a
different registrar -- melbourneit instead of dotster -- and a
different owner. Can anyone suggest appropriate
I've forwared to Bruce Tonkin, who I know personally, at MIT,
and Cliff Page, who I don't know as well, at Dotster, Steve's
note. These are the RC reps for each registrar.
Once upon a time, Robert Kryger [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, Chris Adams wrote:
Good luck dealing with melbourneit.com; that's the place where domains
go to die.
Can you be a little more specific?
You imply that you have experience or anecdotes about this outfit and
this
If I were Panix ...
Free advice. Bruce, Cliff and Chuck are people. Yes, even Chuck is a people.
You want prompt service, you ask nice and you ask the right people and you
don't assume there are facts not in evidence, like errors or malfeasence,
when you could be solving the problem, before
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Eric Brunner-Williams in
Portland Maine writes:
If I were Panix ...
Free advice. Bruce, Cliff and Chuck are people. Yes, even Chuck is a people.
You want prompt service, you ask nice and you ask the right people and you
don't assume there are facts not in
Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If I were Panix ...
Free advice. Bruce, Cliff and Chuck are people. Yes, even Chuck is a people.
You want prompt service, you ask nice and you ask the right people and you
don't assume there are facts not in evidence, like
Howdy Perry,
Alexis Rosen of Panix was on the phone earlier today with the company
attorney for melbourneit -- reputedly he was informed that even if the
police called, they would not do anything about the problem until
Monday their time.
(a) I don't know MIT's attorney, and (b) I wouldn't
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
MelbourneIT needs to demonstrate a proper FOA (Form of Authorization)
to have initiated the transfer and if its found to be invalid the
domain will be re-instated and Melbourne-IT fined.
Thanks. I'm told that dotster says they have no record
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 22:05:47 -0600
Chris Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do know that we've had hosting customers that have had domains with
melbourneit.com as the registrar that they were unable to ever transfer
to another registrar (despite emails, faxes, and phone calls; IIRC one
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:32:46 EST, Henry Yen said:
from panix shell hosts motd:
. panix.net usable as panix.com (marcotte) Sat Jan 15 10:44:57 2005
So let's see.. the users will see this when they log into shell.panix.net
(since shell.panix.com is borked).. Somehow, that doesn't seem to help
Alexis Rosen tried to send this to NANOG earlier this evening but it
looks like it never made it. Apologies if it's a duplicate; we're
both reduced to reading the list via the web interface since the
legitimate addresses for panix.com have now timed out of most folks'
nameservers and been
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:32:46 EST, Henry Yen said:
from panix shell hosts motd:
. panix.net usable as panix.com (marcotte) Sat Jan 15 10:44:57 2005
So let's see.. the users will see this when they log into shell.panix.net
(since
Apologies for what may be another duplicate message, probably with broken
threading. This is Alexis Rosen's original posting to this thread; we
think the mail chaos caused by the hijacking of panix.com kept it from
ever reaching the list (but, flying mostly-blind, we aren't sure).
On Sat, Jan
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 02:22:59AM -0500, Paul G wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Thor Lancelot Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: nanog@merit.edu
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 2:04 AM
Subject: Re: panix.com hijacked (VeriSign refuses to help)
Alexis Rosen tried to send
- Original Message -
From: Thor Lancelot Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Paul G [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 2:40 AM
Subject: Re: panix.com hijacked (VeriSign refuses to help)
--- snip ---
I don't know if these are merely isolated attempts
42 matches
Mail list logo
