recommended reading

Senator Wants to Save the World From 'www.you.suck'

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va. // J. Scott Applewhite/AP File Photo

It's a joke that would be funny only to a sixth-grader. But a top Democratic senator has real concerns over the possibility that website addresses ending in ".sucks" may be used to mock people or organizations.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller said Wednesday that a Web domain like .sucks has "little or no socially redeeming value" and could be used for extortion.

"I view it as little more than a predatory shakedown scheme," Rockefeller wrote in a letter to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the independent group that manages the Web's address system. "The business model behind this [domain name] seems to be the following: force large corporations, small businesses, nonprofits, and even individuals, to pay ongoing fees to prevent seeing the phrase 'sucks' appended to their names on the Internet."

ICANN is currently implementing a plan to expand Web endings, known as generic top-level domains, well beyond the traditional .com and .org. Websites could soon end in words like .car, .music, .love, .pizza, or thousands of other possibilities, including brand names such as .coke.

Three companies—Donuts Inc., Momentous Corp., and Top Level Spectrum—have all applied to own .sucks, and ICANN will have to decide which company (if any) to award the domain to. Momentous has already started soliciting applications so that people can defensively buy .sucks Web addresses to prevent them from falling into the control of others, Rockefeller wrote.

Mason Cole, a spokesman for Donuts, acknowledged that "in certain hands, the domain name could be problematic." But he said trademark owners can ask Donuts to block certain terms for a "small fraction of the cost" of registering new websites.

"Donuts' business model is focused on providing Internet users around the world with real choice in how they craft their online identities," Cole said. "We are not soliciting, and have no plans to solicit, 'defensive registrations.' "

ICANN is an independent nonprofit, and there is little the U.S. government can do to override any of its decisions.

"As a committed supporter of the multi-stakeholder model of global Internet governance, I feel a responsibility to speak up when I see ICANN considering steps that could damage its reputation," Rockefeller wrote.

Threatwatch Alert

Thousands of cyber attacks occur each day

See the latest threats

JOIN THE DISCUSSION

Close [ x ] More from Nextgov
 
 

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from Nextgov.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Featured Content from RSA Conference: Dissed by NIST

    Learn more about the latest draft of the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology guidance document on authentication and lifecycle management.

    Download
  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

    Download
  • Toward A More Innovative Government

    This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

    Download
  • From Volume to Value: UK’s NHS Digital Provides U.S. Healthcare Agencies A Roadmap For Value-Based Payment Models

    The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.

    Download
  • GBC Flash Poll: Is Your Agency Safe?

    Federal leaders weigh in on the state of information security

    Download
  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

    Download

When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.