There is one thing that really troubled me about the Microsoft dynamic DNS fiasco that no one seems to talk about, which I really wanted to raise, but first here’s a short recap for those not in the know: Microsoft “cyber-security” department convinced a US federal court to issue an order to transfer 22 internet domains owned by the popular No-IP dynamic DNS service into their custody, in an attempt to remove specific hosts under those domains that are supposedly used as malware control centers.
The issue I have is very simple – under what conditions can it be possible for a private company, to ask a court to transfer ownership of a property from another private company? This sounds seriously like private policing and somehow it is endorsed by the judicial system ?!? Under what authority can something like this be allowed?
This situation is massively more grievous because the court order was given “ex-parte” – legalese for “without the other party appearing to defend itself”, but even if everything was over the table and in the clear, and the defending lawyer incredibly incompetent, what kind of argument a private entity can offer to get a court to simply transfer control of another private entity?(1).
- Microsoft Cybercrime Shutdown Hit Users Says DDNS Provider(techweekeurope.co.uk)
- No-IP regains control of some domains wrested by Microsoft(pcworld.com)
- Microsoft’s “draconian” No-IP takedown hits millions(pcpro.co.uk)
- Millions of dynamic DNS users suffer after Microsoft seizes No-IP domains(arstechnica.com)
- except obviously arguing that the property was stolen, which is clearly not the case [↩]