Author Topic: Microsoft Steals 22 Domain Names from NoIP (Read 11784 times)

Renegade · « **on:** July 01, 2014, 03:24 AM »

No-IP does DDNS - dynamic DNS. You can run your own server at home with it, letting you host your own web site, email, FTP, etc.

http://www.noip.com/...tm_campaign=takedown

We want to update all our loyal customers about the service outages that many of you are experiencing today. It is not a technical issue. This morning, Microsoft served a federal court order and seized 22 of our most commonly used domains because they claimed that some of the subdomains have been abused by creators of malware.

A private company uses the courts to steal from another company.

Just how does Microsoft get to steal domain names?

Deozaan · « **Reply #1 on:** July 01, 2014, 05:15 AM »

That's what I was wondering. How did Microsoft get the authority to seize the domains? That would be like me seizing all the fireworks at the local fireworks stands because some of them are illegal.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #2 on:** July 01, 2014, 07:16 AM »

Hm... There is sort of a president for this in regard to domain squatting fore the sole purpose of extortion IIRC. I actually looked into it once because of the TClock.com domain being registered (for 10 years out) but never used for anything. But I'd really like to see the list of 22 seized domain names before going there.

wraith808 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 01, 2014, 08:41 AM »

That's what I was wondering. How did Microsoft get the authority to seize the domains? That would be like me seizing all the fireworks at the local fireworks stands because some of them are illegal.
-Deozaan (July 01, 2014, 05:15 AM)

Did they have any documentation backing this up? Seems... irregular.

Hm... There is sort of a president for this in regard to domain squatting fore the sole purpose of extortion IIRC. I actually looked into it once because of the TClock.com domain being registered (for 10 years out) but never used for anything. But I'd really like to see the list of 22 seized domain names before going there.
-Stoic Joker (July 01, 2014, 07:16 AM)

This.

mwb1100 · « **Reply #4 on:** July 01, 2014, 12:30 PM »

Here's Microsoft's take:

- http://blogs.technet...ware-disruption.aspx

SeraphimLabs · « **Reply #5 on:** July 01, 2014, 12:54 PM »

Microsoft doesn't have the authority to do this. They simply motivated the courts to get someone who does have the authority to do it.

This sucks though. Dyn recently got rid of their free dynamic DNS service too, forcing everyone to go paid or go elsewhere.

With no-ip having long been a second most popular option, that's both of the big players in the dynamic DNS arena being down simultaneously.

Fortunately for me I have the DNS infrastructure to just serve my own. But most people don't have that option- you have to have a DNS server to do it with.

wraith808 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 01, 2014, 01:08 PM »

On June 19, Microsoft filed for an ex parte temporary restraining order (TRO) from the U.S. District Court for Nevada against No-IP. On June 26, the court granted our request and made Microsoft the DNS authority for the company’s 23 free No-IP domains, allowing us to identify and route all known bad traffic to the Microsoft sinkhole and classify the identified threats. The new threat information will be added to Microsoft’s Cyber Threat Intelligence Program (CTIP) and provided to Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and global Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERTs) to help repair the damage caused by Bladabindi-Jenxcus and other types of malware.

Relevant part. So Microsoft didn't seize it- that's just a bigger headline. They petitioned the court for a temporary injunction. I would like to see the evidence, but if it is as they state, and due process is followed in a court of law... I'm not so sure in this case what the correct action was. They know where the malware is originating, but not exactly- so they're going to analyse the traffic, which would seem to me to mean that they are going to keep it up? And it looks like all of their domains were affected.

Renegade · « **Reply #7 on:** July 01, 2014, 01:10 PM »

Here's Microsoft's take:

- http://blogs.technet...ware-disruption.aspx

-mwb1100 (July 01, 2014, 12:30 PM)

That was so much horse s**t that I wouldn't even know where to begin.

So, I'll just pick a few.

Playing offense against cybercriminals is what drives me and everyone here at the Microsoft Digital Crimes Unit.

Oh. Right. We're the good guys. Pfft.

We’re taking No-IP to task as the owner of infrastructure frequently exploited by cybercriminals

So MS admits that No-IP is a victim here. Hmm...

On June 19, Microsoft filed for an ex parte temporary restraining order (TRO) from the U.S. District Court for Nevada against No-IP. On June 26, the court granted our request and made Microsoft the DNS authority for the company’s 23 free No-IP domains, allowing us to identify and route all known bad traffic to the Microsoft sinkhole and classify the identified threats.

But that's not what they did.

They stole domain names with the help of the courts, then screwed all the No-IP customers.

They didn't "identify and route all known bad traffic to the Microsoft sinkhole and classify the identified threats". They routed ALL traffic to nowhere.

MS is lying.

As malware authors continue to pollute the Internet, domain owners must act responsibly by monitoring for and defending against cybercrime on their infrastructure.

Nonsense.

This is akin to saying that you are guilty of assault if people come onto your property and get into a fight.

We also worked with A10 Networks, leveraging Microsoft Azure, to configure a sophisticated system to manage the high volume of computer connections generated by botnets such as Bladabindi-Jenxcus.

Right... they leveraged their own technology to drop the ball and leave every No-IP customer out in the cold.

MS should be sued in civil court for damages then prosecuted in criminal court for theft.

The judge that granted the order should also be prosecuted and thrown in prison for being an accomplice to theft.

But, nothing will happen because the courts are not accountable to people. They are accountable to corporations like Microsoft.

Now... want to rape the MS nonsense...

We’re taking No-IP to task...

Oh really?

However, if not properly managed, a free Dynamic DNS service like No-IP can hold top-rank among abused domains.

Please allow me to rephrase that:

However, if not properly managed, an operating system like Windows can hold top-rank among abused operating systems.

Ahem!?!?

Our research revealed that out of all Dynamic DNS providers, No-IP domains are used 93 percent of the time...

Let me rephrase that one...

Our research revealed that out of all operating systems, Windows operating systems are used 93 percent of the time...

Blah... I'm too lazy to continue. MS is just so ridiculous that I shouldn't have to say any of this.

Let me just point out this in finishing:

The following post is from Richard Domingues Boscovich, Assistant General Counsel, Microsoft Digital Crimes Unit.

Written by a lawyer... $:-\$

hamradio · « **Reply #8 on:** July 01, 2014, 03:10 PM »

So technically if this is the case then shouldn't it be rightful to sue Microsoft and others OS makers for making OS's which can run programs that can download illegal content? After all it is happening within software they created...

It's like shooting the messenger...

wraith808 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 01, 2014, 03:23 PM »

So technically if this is the case then shouldn't it be rightful to sue Microsoft and others OS makers for making OS's which can run programs that can download illegal content? After all it is happening within software they created...

It's like shooting the messenger...
-hamradio (July 01, 2014, 03:10 PM)

Not exactly an exact comparison... all of this should come out at the actual hearing though. And whether there'd been any communication of their supposed culpability.

Deozaan · « **Reply #10 on:** July 01, 2014, 03:35 PM »

This sucks though. Dyn recently got rid of their free dynamic DNS service too, forcing everyone to go paid or go elsewhere.

With no-ip having long been a second most popular option, that's both of the big players in the dynamic DNS arena being down simultaneously.
-SeraphimLabs (July 01, 2014, 12:54 PM)

I pay for DynDNS and it's been a good enough value that I consider it worth the price.

That said, I just learned about DuckDNS last night. Folks here may want to look into that if they need an alternative.

Renegade · « **Reply #11 on:** July 01, 2014, 09:03 PM »

That said, I just learned about DuckDNS last night. Folks here may want to look into that if they need an alternative.
-Deozaan (July 01, 2014, 03:35 PM)

Interesting - DuckDNS takes Dogecoin donations.

This sucks though. Dyn recently got rid of their free dynamic DNS service too, forcing everyone to go paid or go elsewhere.

With no-ip having long been a second most popular option, that's both of the big players in the dynamic DNS arena being down simultaneously.
-SeraphimLabs (July 01, 2014, 12:54 PM)

I pay for DynDNS and it's been a good enough value that I consider it worth the price.
-Deozaan (July 01, 2014, 03:35 PM)

I used to use the paid No-IP years ago. It was always very good.

app103 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 02, 2014, 01:00 AM »

I used to use the paid No-IP years ago. It was always very good.
-Renegade (July 01, 2014, 09:03 PM)

I used to use their free service years ago, back when I used to host a website on my home PC, over 33.6k dialup. (yea, I was crazy...and still am.

)

Renegade · « **Reply #13 on:** July 02, 2014, 02:15 AM »

Techdirt chimes in:

https://www.techdirt...-legal-process.shtml

That's not a "technical error." That's Microsoft blatantly making an extreme claim that convinced a judge to hand over a whole bunch of domain names without any kind of due process or adversarial hearing. While Microsoft may have then had a technical error on top of that, what kicked this off was a very, very big legal error.

And this contains the ammo MS used to shoot No-IP:

https://www.techdirt...without-notice.shtml

(Scribd)

FatCat · « **Reply #14 on:** July 02, 2014, 07:38 PM »

I've used the free NOIP service for years to keep track of my support clients. I don't run web servers with it, but if I did I wouldn't run them from within my client networks. Its fantastic for telecommuters and dynamic IPs make my clients a moving target for any would-be hacker turds. NOIP.com still has some DDNSs available so they're still usable. There's no way I'll let Microsoft get me to abandon them. Mark my words, Microsoft is probably positioning itself to be in the DDNs business. 4 million users being inconvenienced in a very poorly implemented attempt to stop malware is just plain shameful, to the point of being suspicious.

Edvard · « **Reply #15 on:** July 03, 2014, 12:48 AM »

18 have been returned:
http://arstechnica.c...cated-no-ip-domains/

As partial justification for the request, Microsoft lawyers argued No-IP didn't follow security best practices.
...
Some defenders of Microsoft's actions have claimed that the consequences of the domain confiscations were limited to administrators who should know better than to rely on dynamic DNS hosting to make their networks work.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #16 on:** July 03, 2014, 06:52 AM »

18 have been returned:
http://arstechnica.c...cated-no-ip-domains/

As partial justification for the request, Microsoft lawyers argued No-IP didn't follow security best practices.
...
Some defenders of Microsoft's actions have claimed that the consequences of the domain confiscations were limited to administrators who should know better than to rely on dynamic DNS hosting to make their networks work.

-Edvard (July 03, 2014, 12:48 AM)

Okay, that's rich ... Just because you know better, doesn't automagically grant you alternatives. shIT happens, and sometimes you just have to work with whatever is available to work with.

40hz · « **Reply #17 on:** July 03, 2014, 08:18 AM »

Once again Microsoft tries to do some micro-spin and ends up making micro-sense.

40hz · « **Reply #18 on:** July 03, 2014, 08:23 AM »

18 have been returned:
http://arstechnica.c...cated-no-ip-domains/

As partial justification for the request, Microsoft lawyers argued No-IP didn't follow security best practices.
...
Some defenders of Microsoft's actions have claimed that the consequences of the domain confiscations were limited to administrators who should know better than to rely on dynamic DNS hosting to make their networks work.

-Edvard (July 03, 2014, 12:48 AM)

Okay, that's rich ... Just because you know better, doesn't automagically grant you alternatives. shIT happens, and sometimes you just have to work with whatever is available to work with.
-Stoic Joker (July 03, 2014, 06:52 AM)

This!

Sure sounds like the old "But she wuz plainly askin' for it dressed like she wuz Yer Honner!" defense argument doesn't it?

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #19 on:** July 03, 2014, 01:04 PM »

Years ago I wrote a program I called DNS Ping-Pong which was really just a service that sent a signed "ping" on a high range port every 30 seconds to a listening app at a one or more remote locations. This way I could keep track of and maintain access to a network as the IP address changed. One of the clients using it was taken over by a corporation that liquidated the office and hauled off all the equipment overnight. I spent the next few years tracking the server all over hell as nobody ever noticed my little service running on it...which continued to report home.

Oops...

Renegade · « **Reply #20 on:** July 10, 2014, 11:03 AM »

Well, well, well, well, well...

http://www.noip.com/...soft-takedown-update]

And, the official MS apology... kind of...

https://www.noip.com...ft-reach-settlement/

Microsoft regrets any inconvenience these customers may have experienced.

Pfft. BS. Start regretting with compensation to the people they screwed.

Having lost seriously disgusting amounts of money because of "errors", I can sympathise. (I bloody well could have been retired by now!)