Stolen CC.com in my posession - Escrow.com, Netsol and FBI involved

[FuseFX]

what is MJ?

Mari.

 

[dominator]

Escrow.com is not responsible, but they could provide info about the transaction, including the account number of the thief (seller).

NetSol is responsible. I have also lost 2 domains because of them.

And they did not allow me to register many good (and available) adult names (in the 90s) because of their censorship...

 

[Fatbat]

Why do any of you still have dealings with Net Sol? They are over priced, with crappy customer support, front running, other dubious business practices and a shoddy track record, as illustrated here.

I haven't done business with them for years save one domain that was registered through til this month, which I just transfered out in Feb. to GD.

Even that took them 4 days to do. Their "VIP" customer email takes at least 3 days to respond to, least that's what they say in their auto reply. In actuality it took them 10 days to reply to my complaint.

Bah, absolutely useless.


Good luck in your battle with those clowns. I'm glad I never have to deal with them again.

 

[katherine]

The reason we are dealing with netsol is because they have good expired names. If you acquire names through namejet they are either with enom or netsol. Obviously you then transfer away.

 

[alldig]

Seller info:

Seller: Rosenbloom Fina ([email protected])
whois email on DVQ.com

He may be a member on DomainState (now banned). Check out this thread:

http://domainstate.com/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=86932


Also, he sent me this unsolicited PM on domainstate:

Subject: NY4.com

Message: Hey, would you accept a trade for ubq.com? Let me know, thanks!

 

[TheLegendaryJP]

Robert is the domain 7c.com ?

My next question then is... why isnt Keven401 banned or question ( not that he is or was active beside 7c.com appraisal days before the name was brokered ( 8 days ) . Obviously the theif in disguise to get idea of value.

http://www.dnforum.com/f4/7c-com-thread-133050.html

 

[jberryhill]

The NSI user agreement controls here, and it gives NSI the discretion to do whatever it wants in the event they believe that the name was stolen. Sex.com is irrelevant, as that was many revisions of the user agreement back in history. Obviously, their user agreement has been amended in view of what happened in that case, among other things.

NSI is not unique in that regard, though.

Your domain names are only as secure as your email. If your email is compromised or hacked then, yes, your domain names can be stolen. Neither NSI nor any other registrar can secure your email for you, and their systems will act in accordance with messages confirmed by the admin contact email.

Many people make claims of "stolen" domain names to registrars, when the names are not actually stolen. How many people do you expect a registrar is required to employ as investigators of these claims, when the margin on a domain name registration is a couple of dollars?

So, let's recap a common scenario.

Able has a domain name able.com. He uses [email protected] as his contact address for his domain registration account. One day, Able is sitting in an airport using a T-mobile connection to access his email. Also in the airport is a hacker with packet sniffing software. The hacker obtains Able's yahoo password.

Next, the hacker uses the password recovery feature of NSI to get the password sent to [email protected], and the hacker now has access to Able's NSI account. The hacker carefully deletes traces of this activity from the yahoo inbox on Able's account.

Using the NSI account, the hacker pushes the domain name to another NSI account, and sells the domain name to Baker for $10,000.

Able discovers his account has been hacked, and he contacts NSI and shows that the domain name was stolen.

Okay, now, explain to me the following:

1. What is it that NSI did wrong?

2. What should NSI do?

3. How is any other registrar immune from this problem?

Discuss.

I am particularly interested in any answer which reduces to an assertion that Able or NSI owes Baker $10,000 in the event that the domain name is returned to Able.

And now I will tell you what really makes me outstandingly unsympathetic to Baker here.

I have never - NEVER - paid $10,000 to someone who's identity I have not personally confirmed. Whence cometh this bullshit about "Escrow.com has the bank account information", you tell me what YOU did to confirm that you weren't paying $10,000 to, for example, someone raising funds for terrorism.

Grow up and take some responsibility. You entered into a business deal, and you did so in a way that provided you with no legal recourse because YOU can't even IDENTIFY who it is you were dealing with? And you want to blame someone else for that?

Sorry. I'm calling bullshit on this entire class of claims. It is absolutely fine if you want to negotiate with and send money to [email protected] via paypal, and if you want to do business that way. But the bottom line is that the person who owes you the $10k is the person you sent it to. And if you did not take ordinary and prudent steps to secure the information that would be necessary to identify that person when you sent them the money, then it is not NSI's fault, it is not the hi-jacking victim's fault, it is YOUR OWN DAMNED FAULT.

We've seen this scenario how many times now? And how many times are we going to see it as long as people conduct this business with the same level of commercial propriety as, say, dealing drugs or turning tricks?

Yesterday on the stair,

I met a man who wasn't there,

He wasn't there again today,

I wish to God he'd go away.


Stop buying domain names from that guy.

(MJ is the brains of the operation here.)

 

[Focus]

MJ is good :smokin: and John is right..

 

[Poohnix]

The NSI user agreement controls here, and it gives NSI the discretion to do whatever it wants in the event they believe that the name was stolen. Sex.com is irrelevant, as that was many revisions of the user agreement back in history. Obviously, their user agreement has been amended in view of what happened in that case, among other things.

NSI is not unique in that regard, though.

Your domain names are only as secure as your email. If your email is compromised or hacked then, yes, your domain names can be stolen. Neither NSI nor any other registrar can secure your email for you, and their systems will act in accordance with messages confirmed by the admin contact email.

Many people make claims of "stolen" domain names to registrars, when the names are not actually stolen. How many people do you expect a registrar is required to employ as investigators of these claims, when the margin on a domain name registration is a couple of dollars?

So, let's recap a common scenario.

Able has a domain name able.com. He uses [email protected] as his contact address for his domain registration account. One day, Able is sitting in an airport using a T-mobile connection to access his email. Also in the airport is a hacker with packet sniffing software. The hacker obtains Able's yahoo password.

Next, the hacker uses the password recovery feature of NSI to get the password sent to [email protected], and the hacker now has access to Able's NSI account. The hacker carefully deletes traces of this activity from the yahoo inbox on Able's account.

Using the NSI account, the hacker pushes the domain name to another NSI account, and sells the domain name to Baker for $10,000.

Able discovers his account has been hacked, and he contacts NSI and shows that the domain name was stolen.

Okay, now, explain to me the following:

1. What is it that NSI did wrong?

2. What should NSI do?

3. How is any other registrar immune from this problem?

Discuss.

(MJ is the brains of the operation here.)

I agree with the above scenario; that can happen anywhere.
However, in this specific case, the OP asked Netsol about the locked status of the domain, and they said it was fine. Later they say that he is to blame, because he didn't investigate the locked status of the domain, ignoring that he did ask them aout it, and they assured him it was fine.
Can that happen with any other registrar too, and who is responsinble? Who could tell him what the status meant, other than Netsol?

 

[Focus]

And we know for CERTAIN that NSI KNEW it was stolen prior to transfer to him? (bdjuf)

 

[Poohnix]

And we know for CERTAIN that NSI KNEW it was stolen prior to transfer to him? (bdjuf)

I suppose nobody knows anything for certain other than Netsol, and if they were cartain, they would have transferred the name to the original owner.
But even if they were just investigating it, (which would appear to be the case - I've had a domain locked the same way by them while they investigated ownership), then they shouldn't have assured the OP that it was fine. If they did. Only the OP can be certain of that.

 

[jberryhill]

However, in this specific case, the OP asked Netsol about the locked status of the domain

And if NSI is investigating a crime, how much information do you want them to give out to random people who call and ask them about it.

How does NSI know that the whole claim about "buying" the domain name is not itself some sort of spoof to launder the stolen name.

I steal a car and drive around town for a while. Worried that the car might have been reported stolen, every now and then I check with the police and say, "Hey, are you looking for a stolen Chevy?"

"No, we aren't."

"Okay, great. Thanks a lot."

 

[DomainsInc]

It seems like the law is never on the domainers side be it being a victim of buying a stolen name or being reverse hijacked.

 

[jberryhill]

It seems like the law is never on the domainers side be it being a victim of buying a stolen name or being reverse hijacked.

No. If you buy a stolen name, you can certainly sue the guy who sold it to you. But if you don't know who it is, then that's not anyone else's problem.

Interesting that you left out the victim of the hi-jacking in the first place.

It is not a question of whether or not the law is "on your side". It is perfectly well "on your side" if you want to recover the money you paid to the guy who sold it to you.

The buyer here could sue "John Doe", and then subpoena the information from Escrow.com, and then subpoena information from the bank (if it is in a country where that would work, which is unlikely).

But recognizing the difficulties that you might encounter when a deal goes bad is the entire reason why normal people in any other business don't enter into $10K transactions as if they were bumming a cigarette from a stranger on the sidewalk.

 

[Focus]

I think "buyer beware" is really the solution to such issues..just 2 weeks ago a business friend of mine was going to buy a domain name worth at least mid $xxx,xxx for a bargain price and did his "due diligence" research and found the name to be stolen, the previous owner then quickly recovered the domain name with the assistance of John Berryhill. If you are involved in ANY deal that seems "to good to be true" just remember, most times it is and there is a reason you feel that way so don't ignore your instincts.

 

[Dave Zan]

However, in this specific case, the OP asked Netsol about the locked status of the domain, and they said it was fine. Later they say that he is to blame, because he didn't investigate the locked status of the domain, ignoring that he did ask them aout it, and they assured him it was fine.

Well, how do we know that's exactly what NSI told the OP? Or if what he had
posted here is his recollection or understanding, which may or may not be the
same as what NSI discussed of his situation?

While I appear to be questioning or even doubting the OP, I've seen and also
experienced a few times where one relays information to another, then that
person relays it to another with either an added but incorrect bit or so. That
happens every other day.

And one reason I wholly agree with John's lenghtly post is because I've dealt
with a few alleged cases of domain hijacking in my previous registrar life. Very
few turn out to be such (which were addressed), while others were he-said-
she-said disputes we wanted no part of lest we screw up and do more harm.

One valuable lesson I learned in my previous registrar life (which I guess I can
learn elsewhere but happened to be that one) is things aren't always as they
seem to be. Or to shorten it in three words, trust...but verify.

And yeah, buyer beware too, as Focus said. People can continue looking for a
variety of excuses or reasons to hold someone else liable, but will it solve the
problem at hand?

 

[tinner666]

Are the stolen domains in 'Prohakerz.com's' hands now? Seems that a lot of them ended up there according to a thread elsewhere.

 

[jberryhill]

I didn't mean to sound unduly harsh, but I have grown very frustrated with situations in which transactions have gone sour, and the aggrieved buyer is unable to identify the seller.

I was involved in a situation in which I did represent such a buyer. He had purchased a domain name from someone who used a false identity and then disappeared. Later on, when the original registrant accused the buyer of being the thief, the buyer had very little to back up the fact that he had purchased it from someone else.

And that's even true if you use escrow.com. Take the following situation:

1. You steal a domain name using the name and identity "Joe".

2. You open a bank account in Turkey.

3. You then use your real identity, "Jack" to correspond with "Joe" about purchasing the domain name for $10K.

4. As "Joe" you start an Escrow transaction and specify the Turkish bank account.

5. As "Jack" you pay the $10K to Escrow.com and "Joe" transfers the name to you.

Okay, so now the original registrant notices the theft and takes action. You, Jack, have the stolen domain name.

Do you seriously believe, that you aren't under suspicion as the thief? Do you seriously believe that if NSI is investigating the theft they are going to give you accurate information about the investigation or status of the name?

You can whine all you'd like about the $10K you "lost", but if you can't identify the person you paid it to, then you have no way of showing that you are not the thief.

Again, I've dealt with this kind of situation from the buyer's end. The original registrant sued him for stealing the domain name, and just didn't understand that, yes, domainers are often utterly brain-dead businesspeople who keep lousy records and engage in deals with people they can't identify or locate after the deal is done. It was an ugly situation.

But you can't keep doing business that way. If you do, then you just have to accept the fact that you are going to get burned. Again, the law is perfectly on your "side" as long as you don't have shitty, slaphazard business practices.

Put it in any other context. You find me driving around in your stolen car. You say to me, "Hey, that's my car."

"No, I bought it. It's my car."

"Oh really? Who did you buy it from?"

"Um. Some guy on the internet."

"Who?"

"Um. I don't know."

"You don't know? How did you pay him? Where did the money go?"

"Um. I used Escrow.com, so I don't know where the money went?"

"So, you bought my car from a guy you can't identify, and you don't know where the money went? Yeah, right pal. Get the **** out of my car."

My personal well of sympathy for buyers in this situation is officially dry.

 

[DomainsInc]

I didn't mean to sound unduly harsh, but I have grown very frustrated with situations in which transactions have gone sour, and the aggrieved buyer is unable to identify the seller.

I was involved in a situation in which I did represent such a buyer. He had purchased a domain name from someone who used a false identity and then disappeared. Later on, when the original registrant accused the buyer of being the thief, the buyer had very little to back up the fact that he had purchased it from someone else.

And that's even true if you use escrow.com. Take the following situation:

1. You steal a domain name using the name and identity "Joe".

2. You open a bank account in Turkey.

3. You then use your real identity, "Jack" to correspond with "Joe" about purchasing the domain name for $10K.

4. As "Joe" you start an Escrow transaction and specify the Turkish bank account.

5. As "Jack" you pay the $10K to Escrow.com and "Joe" transfers the name to you.

Okay, so now the original registrant notices the theft and takes action. You, Jack, have the stolen domain name.

Do you seriously believe, that you aren't under suspicion as the thief? Do you seriously believe that if NSI is investigating the theft they are going to give you accurate information about the investigation or status of the name?

You can whine all you'd like about the $10K you "lost", but if you can't identify the person you paid it to, then you have no way of showing that you are not the thief.

Again, I've dealt with this kind of situation from the buyer's end. The original registrant sued him for stealing the domain name, and just didn't understand that, yes, domainers are often utterly brain-dead businesspeople who keep lousy records and engage in deals with people they can't identify or locate after the deal is done. It was an ugly situation.

But you can't keep doing business that way. If you do, then you just have to accept the fact that you are going to get burned. Again, the law is perfectly on your "side" as long as you don't have shitty, slaphazard business practices.

Put it in any other context. You find me driving around in your stolen car. You say to me, "Hey, that's my car."

"No, I bought it. It's my car."

"Oh really? Who did you buy it from?"

"Um. Some guy on the internet."

"Who?"

"Um. I don't know."

"You don't know? How did you pay him? Where did the money go?"

"Um. I used Escrow.com, so I don't know where the money went?"

"So, you bought my car from a guy you can't identify, and you don't know where the money went? Yeah, right pal. Get the **** out of my car."

My personal well of sympathy for buyers in this situation is officially dry.

What measures can be taken to prove identity over the internet?

 

[jberryhill]

What measures can be taken to prove identity over the internet?

"Prove" is not the right word. What things you might do will depend on what is reasonable under the circumstances, and what risk level you are comfortable with. If you don't mind losing $100 over a deal that is fraudulent, then you have to accept that things won't work out.

It also depends on whom you are dealing with. People in some countries are easier to check out than in some other countries. That, again, goes to risk.

There are other things one can do, of course, such as checking the domain history, inquiring with former owners, looking for unusual admin contact changes such as from [email protected] to [email protected]. Googling names, email addresses, physical addresses, and so on; inspecting email headers. Hackers LOVE gmail since the originating IP address isn't available.

A level of mathematical certitude is not necessary or ever attainable, and all sorts of things can be forged of course. But forging things like drivers licenses, passports, birth certificates, notary seals, etc. requires an extra level of effort at the other end, and provides additional data for the confirmatory mill.

The point is that anything is a lot better than nothing. When you do a deal, you have to ask yourself whether you are comfortable with the level of confirmation you have received. Expect the deal to go bad, and behave in accordance with that expectation.