Re: [registrars] RE: Registrar Approval of Variable Accreditation Fee for 2003-2004

[Larry Erlich <erlich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Additionally, since many registrars
don't send out postal notices, there is nothing to
prevent someone from using someone elses legitimate
address for the registrant information.

Larry

Donny Simonton wrote:
> 
> The biggest problem we have found is getting the address information from
> all of the different countries to be able to have a 100% correct address
> verification system.  In the US and Canada and I'm sure other countries you
> can buy address information for a few thousand a year.  Then you have to buy
> the phone numbers from somebody else, Neustar if I remember correctly.  That
> would work fine for US and Canada.
> 
> But most of our fraud is not in the US or Canada, it's in other countries
> that you are not able to get the address information from their postal
> service.  And how would you verify this address anyway?  This is a real
> address of one of our customers.
> "120 meters past McDonald's on Rue Flat Road".
> 
> Yes and it's valid, because a hotel that is also on the same street is 240
> meters past McDonald's.
> 
> So address and phone number verification is a great idea, we spent almost 2
> months working on it, then you get outside the US and Canada and you run
> into all kinds of issues with trying to verify the address and phone number.
> Good in theory, not good in practice.
> 
> Donny
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-
> > registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rick Wesson
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 9:53 AM
> > To: Elana Broitman
> > Cc: Registrars List
> > Subject: RE: [registrars] RE: Registrar Approval of Variable Accreditation
> > Fee for 2003-2004
> >
> >
> >
> > Elana,
> >
> > do you have a link to information about the hearing?
> >
> > my $.02...
> >
> > doing registrant validation on signup cuts down fraud so if one reviews
> > the amount of chargebacks one gets verses the cost of whois accuracy
> > requirements performing such validation actually saves us more in
> > chargebacks than costs us in performing the validation.
> >
> > We allow just about anything through the signup process and just don't
> > process the fraudulent or highly supcious applications.
> >
> > We are working on more elaborate techniques to handle bounces and staging
> > other automated means of communication such as: if email bounces and we
> > have a fax, send a fax, if the fax bounces send a postcard, if all
> > attempts bounce note the information is bad and lock the account with a
> > note that will require additional information if the registrant comes to
> > renew the domain.
> >
> > We could get even more elaborate by identifying telephone numbers that are
> > mobile numbers and sending an SMS message but we don't have the volume of
> > registrations to make that interesting yet.
> >
> > best,
> >
> > -rick
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Elana Broitman wrote:
> >
> > > On the same note, I am again going out to everyone with a request for
> > > some data (even merely anecdotal) on how you comply with whois
> > > accuracy requirements in the RAA and cost of doing so.  This is very
> > > important to provide before tomorrow's Congressional hearing in order
> > > help protect us from "unfunded mandates" based on incomplete
> > > information supplied by interest groups pushing for more Whois
> > > verification and availability.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Elana Broitman
> >
> >