Re: Privacy/Proxy by David Khoo
Although i believe that this post has been made in error i would like to respond to it. I am an administrator of several sites, and as such i can say that a lot of spam comes from bots and e-mail aggregators which are able to find an e-mail address wherever it is published on the internet. As such the WHOIS database became a de-facto tool for such bots to collect addresses for the subsequent spamming (the spamming can be done by bot-nets of infected computers as well as running a server which does the spamming, thus eliminating the servers will not eliminate the spam, but making the process of collecting e-mail addresses more costly will hinder the spammer's job). In addition to that we must remember that many people live in the socially repressive regimes such as Britain, Russia, or United States. Posting their details (even electronic details such as e-mail) can lead to reprisals from fundamentalists, employers, or the law enfocement agencies if an individual choses to voice the views deemed inappropropriate by the establishment. The identity theft is also becoming more and more popular on the internet. With the culture of social networks, which already provide a variety information on an individual, addition to that public knowledge the ownership of specific domains should remain an option but not the responsibility of the person. To summarise:The findings in the Privacy Proxy Registration Services Study Report should never be used as evidence to restrict or forbid Privacy or Proxy services for the domain name registration because: * restricting privacy services would open the domain owner to the spam attack* restricting privacy or proxy services would open the domain owner to attacks from fundamentalists, employers, or law enforcement agencies * restricting privacy services would become a tool in the arcenal of an identity thief.
- Volodya
--
http://freedom.libsyn.com/ Echo of Freedom, Radical Podcast
"None of us are free until all of us are free." ~ Mihail Bakunin
|