Search Mailing List Archives

Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[liberationtech] The Internet Kill Switch; With Global Wiretapping Capability?

Amin Sabeti aminsabeti at
Mon May 7 04:33:33 PDT 2012

It's so interesting! But for Yahoo it's not correct:

WHOIS information for

Whois Server Version 2.0
Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to
for detailed information.
   Domain Name: YAHOO.COM
   Registrar: MARKMONITOR INC.
   Whois Server:
   Referral URL:
   Name Server: NS1.YAHOO.COM
   Name Server: NS2.YAHOO.COM
   Name Server: NS3.YAHOO.COM
   Name Server: NS4.YAHOO.COM
   Name Server: NS5.YAHOO.COM
   Status: clientDeleteProhibited
   Status: clientTransferProhibited
   Status: clientUpdateProhibited
   Status: serverDeleteProhibited
   Status: serverTransferProhibited
   Status: serverUpdateProhibited
   Updated Date: 18-dec-2011
   Creation Date: 18-jan-1995
   Expiration Date: 19-jan-2013

On 7 May 2012 10:40, Eugen Leitl <eugen at> wrote:

> The Internet Kill Switch; With Global Wiretapping Capability?
> One company to rule them all
> One company to find them;
> One company to bring them all
> And in the darkness bind them
> Recently run any whois queries on Google? No? How about Facebook? MSN, or
> Hotmail? Yahoo? You might be surprised, comparing the results.
> Nice, innit? See the "Last Updated" part also.
> The brand-protecting, anti-piracy company MarkMonitor Inc. has had all
> these DNS names under its control for several months now.
> They also control the Wikimedia name services, even though that doesn't
> show up on the whois record. There are many others.
> falls under their jurisdiction, as does Yep, under
> MarkMonitor. See a pattern here?
> MarkMonitor also is a trusted Certificate Authority; they have, in
> essence, the means to fabricate safe-looking SSL connections for you, to
> whichever host they want. Your browser will not sound any warnings of
> possible man-in-the-middle attacks.
> MarkMonitor is a company that can own most people's "Internet" in minutes.
> It now controls all three top free e-mail providers directly, and I suppose
> it's safe to say, most currently active social media sites too.
> See for yourself. Whois, whois, whois,
> whois, whois, whois, whois
> the list seems endless.
> How'd all this happen?
> This company has acquired complete access to monitor, eavesdrop, censor
> and fake any user of these popular Internet services in about one year
> (2011). In almost complete silence. For several of the sites, it also
> provides "firewall proxy" services, which means it is actually paid to
> intercept all communications. In and out.
> The situation reminds me of Joseph Lieberman's 2010 initiative to create
> an "Internet kill switch" for the U.S.
> The government only needs to control this one company, and most social
> media, most free e-mail, most search engines will be under its control. Not
> to mention most operating systems, for both computers and mobile devices.
> Not only inside U.S., but globally. One company to rule them all.
> I, for one, would like to ask; WTF is going on? How did these guys, this
> relatively small domain-hogging and pirate-chasing company, get the
> resources to simply acquire the DNS records of all the most popular
> Internet services? How can this be so totally ignored by the media, and
> even privacy advocates? Even conspiracy theorists seem to be completely
> ignoring the situation.
> Secure communication is an illusion
> Only one company to rule them all? As if all this doesn't sound bad
> enough, the problem is far more widespread. MarkMonitor could easily act as
> a global "kill switch" for the sites under its rule. But as it turns out,
> most anyone with some resources could just as easily impersonate
> MarkMonitor itself.
> Because, as one might have noticed in the past few months, the whole SSL
> certificate scheme is broken. Not in a technical sense - there's no known
> inherent weakness in the algorithms. But the whole SSL protection is based
> on trust, and that trust has failed us.
> According to several sources, SSL CA certs are routinely given out to
> anyone willing to pay for them. As The Register points out in its analysis
> on TrustWave spying scandal:
> "Those defending Trustwave suggested that other vendors probably used the
> same approach for so-called "data loss prevention" environments - systems
> that inspect information flowing through a network to prevent leaks of
> commercially sensitive data."
> ...
> "In fact Geotrust was openly advertising a 'Georoot' product on their
> website until fairly recently."
> Oh, so the ability to impersonate anyone is normal day-to-day practise for
> big business? Just imagine what government agencies must be doing - for
> example in Sweden, where the military intelligence organisation FRA has the
> mandate to monitor all traffic across borders.
> Who can seriously claim they trust all the hundreds of different CA
> companies, several of which have been caught red-handed with selling out
> their customers' security, or covering up very serious breeches (up to and
> including their root certificates being stolen).
> MarkMonitor is a "brand-protecting" company. Traditionally its business
> has been reserving domains to protect brands. You buy its service, it makes
> sure that nobody else can have "".
> Also, they're an anti-piracy outfit. Their entire business is based on
> protecting IP.
> Just saying, someone should probably question them and their customers.
> Why does Google, who always "do things themselves", externalise these vital
> parts of its network? How come all the competing phone and OS vendors, who
> sue each other all the time, suddenly trust this one company?
> And then there's all those competing social media companies, who
> practically thrive on what others call "IP theft", including their users
> sharing text, images, music, videos and links?
> Big questions. Defy common sense. Need answers.
> _______________________________________________
> liberationtech mailing list
> liberationtech at
> Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to:
> If you would like to receive a daily digest, click "yes" (once you click
> above) next to "would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily
> digest?"
> You will need the user name and password you receive from the list
> moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here:
> Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator.
> Please don't forget to follow us on!/Liberationtech
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the liberationtech mailing list