« Freedom Of Speech Does Not Extend To Criticising The Police | Home | Recent Comments | Categories | DRM can bite my ass »
Site-Lookup Service Foils Fraud
[Quote:]
The OpenDNS system, which will open its servers to the public Monday, wants to be a more user-friendly name resolution service than those provided by ISPs, with technology to keep fraudulent sites out of its listings, correct some typos and help browsers look up web pages faster.
Setting up an internet connection to use OpenDNS is about as difficult as setting up a POP3 e-mail account, and more advanced users can tinker with their router settings to make the change across a small network.
In return, sites like the notoriously sluggish MySpace.com load significantly faster, thanks to the way OpenDNS caches IP addresses. Users who type “wordpres.sorg” or “craigslist.or” into their browser’s address field are automatically routed to the correct address, instead of getting a 404 error page.
Those who click on a link in a phishing e-mail that attempts to take them to a fake site and con them into entering their credit card number won’t even make it to the website, if OpenDNS knows about it.
[..]
“The problems we are trying to solve, such as phishing and malware, these are social DNS problems, not technical,” Ulevitch says. “Recursive DNS servers are the root of the problem. None of these attacks work without DNS. We set out to create a DNS server and DNS service that provides intelligence and transparency into the way recursive DNS service works.”
The startup hopes to make money when users type in a nonexistent domain name, such as schwinnbicyclepumps.com.
Currently, web surfers simple get an error message when they attempt to navigate to an unused domain. OpenDNS users will instead be routed to a company server that will present a list of search engine results and paid advertisements.
So these guys found a social problem, and their answer is a technical solution that throws censorship and advertising at the user.
Right.
I’ll save my enthusiasm for something else.
|
John,
I think that a lot was missed on Slashdot and a bit in the wired article. This isn’t about advertising and censorship. This is about choice and transparency, the opposite of what you’re suggesting.
All OpenDNS users can decide if they want typo’s caught and corrected or if they want us to block phishing sites. There’s nothing about censorship in giving people choice. I think you should check out my background and history a bit before making these conclusions, and at the very least, trying the service.
I appreciate the comments though, you have no idea how seriously we take these issues. We’ve gone to great lengths to make sure we are doing the right things. I think you’ll see that.
Best,
David
You’re going to great lengths, I’ll give you that. Responding to my weblog is certainly appreciated, you’re far, far more open than most software that blocks. For that, you at least deserve a polite reply and an explanation.
Here’s one of the biggest problems: I have no way of finding out who you are blocking, why you are blocking, and what I could do to get off your list if you mistakenly happen to block anything from me.
You could be blocking something I value very much and I wouldn’t know it. You may want to look at the policy by dsbl.org, a blocklist I contribute to. Everything is out in the open, it is a major part of the policy. Right now you qualify as censorware in my book because I have no way to know what you are doing, and no way to check on you. You may very well – without my knowledge – replace what I’m looking for with advertising for something I’m not looking for at all, and I find that utterly disgusting.
As a secondary problem, your wildcard resolving breaks software – you already know about that, you’ve seen the ruckus with verisign. You’re deliberately breaking one of the most important standards that is very important to a working internet, and that, too, I find utterly disgusting.
Your motives may very well be good, but I find your methods detrimental to reaching your goals.
Oh, and I’ll remain in your project honeypot, which I do find very useful.
I’d encourage you to read CEO David Ulevitch’s response on Slashdot to some of your concerns.
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=190745&cid=15691232
We’re going to give you control over things like the phishing prevention and typo correction.
John Roberts
OpenDNS
John, how do you suggest a service like OpenDNS can realistically be funded?
My hourly fee for business-plan development is € 200 and up, depending on your needs. I have not been hired by OpenDNS, so it’s not my responsibility to come up with plans to cover that.
Thank you for your comment on my weblog, but I’m going to stand by my previous reply to David.
I’m sorry, that may have been a bit harsh, but I’m fed up with “and how do you suggest they fund that if not by advertising” when every time the answer is the same: it is not my problem. I’m merely pointing out why I refuse to use whatever service we’re talking about, and if said service is destined to fail because of that, it is not my responsibility to fix that.