panix hijack press

William Allen Simpson wsimpson at
Thu Jan 20 02:35:21 UTC 2005

Thornton wrote:

>On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 15:51 -0800, Dan Hollis wrote:
>>On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Darrell Greenwood wrote:
>>>customers' domains. says its domain name was locked, and
>>>that despite this, it was still transferred. ®
>>I seem to recall someone saying it wasnt locked, now theyre saying it was?
>panix claims it was locked but I dont think it was.  Like was mentioned
>they locked there other domains after was taken over.  Why
>would they just lock one domain?
Upon what verifiable facts do you base your endless speculation?

(1) Stop blaming the victim!

(2) Registrants can't "lock" domains, it's a registrar-lock.  Users
can only ask that domains be locked.  Stupid policy, bad results.

(3) This is a red-herring issue anyway, since there is no evidence
that Mel-IT ever sent notification, or even waited 5 days for a
response.  The domain was hijacked in the middle of the night, in the
middle of a weekend -- a very odd time for confirming responses by a
staff that wasn't in the office answering the phones....

(4) Mel-IT has admitted it "failed to properly confirm", and a
"loophole" caused the error.

(5) Mel-IT has an executive and a lawyer that were both notified about
the problem, and refused to mitigate the damage.

(6) Stop blaming the victim!

William Allen Simpson
    Key fingerprint =  17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26  DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32

More information about the NANOG mailing list