Re: Domain name spying?

"Jim" <spamaddyTAKEOUT@bellsouth.net> writes:

> I've either been scammed or very unfortunate.
>
> I've been talking to a customer about a building a website for the past
> couple of weeks. The name, jodysoptical.com was available during these
> negotiations.

What sites were you using to determine jodysoptical.com was available
during these negotiations? That might dictate whether a scam is at
work.

> Are people like Nameview.com "spying" on domain name searches then
> snapping them up for resale?

I've always suspected that there are folks in the business of this (or
envisioned the technical possibility), so I've always been very
careful about where I did my search for available domain names. This
is the first I've heard of hard confirmation of someone being affected
by it.

Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

"Todd H." <comphelp@toddh.net> wrote in message
news:84hdeo6x7i.fsf@ripco.com...
> "Jim" <spamaddyTAKEOUT@bellsouth.net> writes:
>
>> I've either been scammed or very unfortunate.
>>
>> I've been talking to a customer about a building a website for the past
>> couple of weeks. The name, jodysoptical.com was available during these
>> negotiations.
>
> What sites were you using to determine jodysoptical.com was available
> during these negotiations? That might dictate whether a scam is at
> work.
>
>> Are people like Nameview.com "spying" on domain name searches then
>> snapping them up for resale?
>
> I've always suspected that there are folks in the business of this (or
> envisioned the technical possibility), so I've always been very
> careful about where I did my search for available domain names. This
> is the first I've heard of hard confirmation of someone being affected
> by it.
>
> Best Regards,
> --
> Todd H.
> http://www.toddh.net/

Hi,
where would you suggest doing name searches and name purchases?

Paul
www.paulwatt.info

"Jim" <spamaddyTAKEOUT@bellsouth.net> writes:

> Surely two or three searches for "jodysoptical" at Netsol wouldn't trigger a
> purchase of a domain . . . . Or would it?

I wouldn't put anything past the crooks at Network Solutions.

--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

On 21 Jul 2005 1120 -0500, comphelp@toddh.net (Todd H.) wrote:

>"Jim" <spamaddyTAKEOUT@bellsouth.net> writes:
>
>> Surely two or three searches for "jodysoptical" at Netsol wouldn't trigger a
>> purchase of a domain . . . . Or would it?
>
>I wouldn't put anything past the crooks at Network Solutions.

My thoughts exactly.

--
Ken
http://www.ke9nr.net/

In article <CxPDe.16522$dz.15797@bignews4.bellsouth.net>,
"Jim" <spamaddyTAKEOUT@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> That shouldn't matter. When signed into Godaddy, I'm under a RC4 128-bit
> encryption. Surely Nameview.com hasn't somehow broken this security and
> somehow knew I was about to buy the domain.

If you were using Windows at the time, there are 800 easier ways for
malware to monitor your web usage than breaking encryption.

"Doc O'Leary" <droleary.usenet@2h2005.subsume.com> wrote in message
news:droleary.usenet-C8CF4E.23241621072005@corp.supernews.com...
> In article <CxPDe.16522$dz.15797@bignews4.bellsouth.net>,
> "Jim" <spamaddyTAKEOUT@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> That shouldn't matter. When signed into Godaddy, I'm under a RC4 128-bit
>> encryption. Surely Nameview.com hasn't somehow broken this security and
>> somehow knew I was about to buy the domain.
>
> If you were using Windows at the time, there are 800 easier ways for
> malware to monitor your web usage than breaking encryption.

I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that there is no malware on my
system.

And there are many more than 800.

--
Jim

In article <eM6Ee.14953$do5.14239@bignews5.bellsouth.net>,
"Jim" <spamaddyTAKEOUT@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that there is no malware on my
> system.

Any good con knows that the easiest person to fool is the one who is
certain they cannot be fooled. I'll take that bet if you give me good
odds. Say 800 to 1?

> And there are many more than 800.

Microsoft innovation hard at work.