<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>John Levine &#45; CircleID</title>
		<link>http://www.circleid.com/</link>
		<description>Postings from John Levine on CircleID</description>
		<dc:language>en</dc:language>
		<dc:rights>Copyright 2010, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
		<dc:date>2010-03-06T11:06:01-08:00</dc:date>
		

		
		<item>
			<title> Are Portable Email Addresses Possible? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/are_portable_email_addresses_possible</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/are_portable_email_addresses_possible</link>
			<description><![CDATA[News reports say that the Israeli government is close to passing a law that requires portable e-mail addresses, similar to portable phone numbers. Number portability has been a success, making it much easier to switch from one provider to another, and address portability might ease switching among ISPs. But e-mail is not phone calls. Is it even possible? <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/are_portable_email_addresses_possible">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2010-03-06T11:06:01-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Google Loses Another Domain Name Dispute (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100101_google_loses_another_domain_name_dispute</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100101_google_loses_another_domain_name_dispute</link>
			<description><![CDATA[For the benefit of trademark owners, ICANN has something called the UDRP (Uniform Dispute Resolution Process) that allows the owner to file a complaint against an allegedly infringing domain name, to be resolved by one of a small set of arbitrators. About 90% of UDRP cases that proceed to a decision are decided in favor of the complainant; opinions differ as to whether that's because of the merit of the complaints or the institutional bias of the arbitrators. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100101_google_loses_another_domain_name_dispute">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2010-01-02T00:14:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Just Make It Stop (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/just_make_it_stop</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/just_make_it_stop</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In a recent discussion among mail system managers, we learned that one of the large spam filter providers now has an option to reject all mail from ESPs (e-mail service providers, outsourced bulk mailers) regardless of opt-in, opt-out, spam complaints, or anything else, just block it all. Some of the ESPs wondered what would drive people to do that... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/just_make_it_stop">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-12-04T16:14:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> US Court Levies $15 Million Fine Against Spammer (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20091130_us_court_15_million_fine_against_spammer</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20091130_us_court_15_million_fine_against_spammer</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Earlier this year, the New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs, the US Federal Trade Commission, and the Australian CMA broke up a large fake drug spam ring known as Herbal Kings, run by New Zealander Lance Atkinson. The NZ government fined him NZ$108,000 (about US$80,000) which, while a substantial fine, seemed pretty small compared to the amount of money he must have made. But today, at the FTC's request a US judge fined Atkinson US$15.5 million, and got his US accomplice Jody Smith to turn over $800,000, including over $500,000 in an Israeli bank. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20091130_us_court_15_million_fine_against_spammer">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-11-30T12:11:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> A Thought About Not-Quite-ASCII Top Level Domains (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/a_thought_about_not_quite_ascii_top_level_domains</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/a_thought_about_not_quite_ascii_top_level_domains</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ICANN has opened their new <a href="http://www.icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-track/">fast track</a> process for "countries and territories that use languages based on scripts other than Latin" to get domain names that identify the country or territory in its own language. It's not clear to me what the policy is supposed to be for countries whose languages use extended Latin with accents and other marks that aren't in the ASCII set. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/a_thought_about_not_quite_ascii_top_level_domains">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-11-19T10:29:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> How Do You Do Secure Bank Transactions on the Internet? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/how_do_you_do_secure_bank_transactions_on_the_internet</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/how_do_you_do_secure_bank_transactions_on_the_internet</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Banks love it when their customers do their transactions on line, since it is so much cheaper than when they use a bank-provided ATM, a phone call center, or, perish forbid, a live human teller. Customers like it too, since bank web sites are usually open 24/7, there's no line and no need to find a parking place. Unfortunately, crooks like on line banking too, since it offers the possibility of stealing lots of money. How can banks make their on line transactions more secure? <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/how_do_you_do_secure_bank_transactions_on_the_internet">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-11-09T10:28:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> The Tempest in the TLD Teapot (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20091108_the_tempest_in_the_tld_teapot</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20091108_the_tempest_in_the_tld_teapot</link>
			<description><![CDATA[At its recent meeting in Seoul ICANN announced with great fanfare that it's getting ever closer to adding lots of new Top Level Domains (TLDs). Despite all the hype, new TLDs will make little difference... I agree with my old friend Lauren Weinstein that this is a tempest in a very expensive teapot, because all of the purported reasons that people want new TLDs have been proven false, and the one actual reason that a new TLD would be valuable has no public benefit. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20091108_the_tempest_in_the_tld_teapot">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-11-08T23:08:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Helping Banks Fight Phishing and Account Fraud, Whether They Like It or Not (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090821_helping_banks_fight_phishing_and_account_fraud</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090821_helping_banks_fight_phishing_and_account_fraud</link>
			<description><![CDATA[On Wednesday, <a href="http://www.projecthoneypot.org/"">Project Honey Pot</a> filed <a href="http://www.taugh.com/109cv940.pdf">an unusual lawsuit</a> against "John Does stealing money from US businesses through unauthorized electronic transfers made possible by computer viruses transmitted in spam." Their attorney is Jon Praed of the <a href="http://www.i-lawgroup.com/">Internet Law Group</a>, who is one of the most experienced anti-spam lawyers around, with whom I have worked in the past. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090821_helping_banks_fight_phishing_and_account_fraud">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-08-21T13:53:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Are Phishing and Malware Separate Threats? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/are_phishing_and_malware_separate_threats</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/are_phishing_and_malware_separate_threats</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Phishing is when bad guys try to impersonate a trusted organization, so they can steal your credentials. Typically they'll send you a fake e-mail that appears to be from a bank, with a link to a fake website that also looks like the bank. Malware offers another more insidious way to steal your credentials, by running unwanted code on your computer... I like VeriSign's characterization of this kind of malware as an insecure endpoint, the PC which is the endpoint of the conversation with the bank isn't actually under the control of the person who's using it. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/are_phishing_and_malware_separate_threats">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-08-17T08:41:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Why Can't We Make the Internet Secure? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/why_cant_we_make_the_internet_secure</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/why_cant_we_make_the_internet_secure</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In a discussion about a recent denial of service attack against Twitter, someone asked, "Some class of suppliers must be making money off of the weaknesses. Anybody out there have a prescription for the cure?" Sure, but you're not going to like it. The Internet was originally a walled garden, where its operators knew who all the users were and could eject anyone who misbehaved... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/why_cant_we_make_the_internet_secure">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-08-09T12:39:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> How Unconscionable is the Profit That Verisign Makes from Its Registry? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/how_unconscionable_is_profit_that_verisign_makes_from_registry</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/how_unconscionable_is_profit_that_verisign_makes_from_registry</link>
			<description><![CDATA[VeriSign makes a great deal of money from the .COM and .NET registries. Can we tell how much they make, and how much that might change if the <a href="http://weblog.johnlevine.com/ICANN/cfittrap.html">CFIT lawsuit</a> succeeds? It's not hard to make some estimates from public information. The largest gTLD registry that VeriSign doesn't run is .ORG, which was transferred a few years ago to the Public Internet Registry (PIR) which pays Afilias to run the registry, and uses whatever is left over to support the Internet Society (ISOC)... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/how_unconscionable_is_profit_that_verisign_makes_from_registry">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-07-11T20:58:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Three Myths About DKIM (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/three_myths_about_dkim</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/three_myths_about_dkim</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The DKIM standard has been out for two years now, and we're starting to see some adoption by large mail systems, but there's still a lot of misunderstanding about what DKIM does and doesn't do... Any a mail system can add a signatures to the messages it handles, and spammers can sign their mail, too. A DKIM signature contains, stripped down to its basics, the domain of the signer and a checksum of the message. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/three_myths_about_dkim">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-07-06T07:04:01-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> What are TLDs Good For? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090703_what_are_tlds_good_for</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090703_what_are_tlds_good_for</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yesterday I said that the original motivations for adding new TLDs were to break VeriSign's monopoly on .COM, and to use domain names as directories. Competitive registrars broke the monopoly more effectively than any new domains, and the new domains that tried to be directories have failed. So what could a new TLD do? <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090703_what_are_tlds_good_for">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-07-03T12:45:01-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Who Needs More TLDs? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090701_who_needs_more_tlds</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090701_who_needs_more_tlds</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ICANN's Sydney meeting has come and gone, with the promised flood of new Top-Level Domains (TLDs) claimed to be ever closer to reality. Does the world need more TLDs? Well, no. Way back in the mid 1990s, it seemed obvious that Internet users would use the DNS as a directory, particularly once early web browsers started to add .COM to words typed in the address bar. This led to the first Internet land rush, with heavy hitters like Procter and Gamble registering diarrhea.com in 1995... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090701_who_needs_more_tlds">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-07-01T19:13:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Appeals Court Revives the CFIT Anti-Trust Suit Against VeriSign (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090605_appeals_court_revives_cfit_anti_trust_suit_against_verisign</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090605_appeals_court_revives_cfit_anti_trust_suit_against_verisign</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Back in 2005 an organization called the Coalition for Internet Transparency (CFIT) burst upon the scene at the Vancouver ICANN meeting, and filed an anti-trust suit against VeriSign for their monopoly control of the .COM registry and of the market in expiring .COM domains. They didn't do very well in the trial court, which granted Verisign's motion to dismiss the case. But yesterday the Ninth Circuit reversed the trial court and put the suit back on track. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090605_appeals_court_revives_cfit_anti_trust_suit_against_verisign">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2009-06-05T16:19:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>