Proxy registration providers (No Such Weblog)

Proxy registration providers

I'm currently looking at "proxy registration providers", i.e., at firms that offer domain name registrations where WHOIS records don't identify the actual registrant, but the proxy service. I have, so far, found the following providers (quite a few thanks to hints contained in the ISPCP's submission to Task Force 2):

Aplus (known in registrar listings as Abacus America) offers "unlisted" domain name registrations through a sister company. I was not able to find any terms and conditions on their web site, but that may have something to do with browser compatibility issues.
Domains By Proxy is a sister company of accredited registrar Go Daddy. Terms and conditions.
IDdp appears to be affiliated with accredited registrar Key Systems GmbH. Terms and conditions.
Katz Global does domain name registration for cash and e-gold, and does not collect any information except for an e-mail address. Terms of Service; Acceptable Use Policy.
Silent Register appears to be an enom reseller; Terms and Conditions.
ProxyOne also seems to be an enom reseller; Terms of Service.
1001 discrete resources uses contact information in Panama, and gives an Antigua address in its registration agreement. Limitations; registration agreement.
alpina1.net is, according to WHOIS, owned by Mr. Dagobert Duck from Hanoi. This may be a Tucows reseller. Recommend e-gold as payment method. Terms and Conditions don't give much information about their "unlisted registration service."
anonix doesn't offer much information; the approach is apparently to collect as little information as possible. Acceptable Usage Policy; Domain Registration service description.

Am I missing any known services of this kind? Are there any "war stories" about the conditions under which information about registrants is actually disclosed by those providers that collect it? Comments welcome.

Posted by Thomas Roessler on February 24, 2004 11:44 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://log.does-not-exist.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/964

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Proxy registration providers:

» Whois-Entscheidung naht from Wortfeld
ICANNs GNSO debattiert �ber einen zweistufigen Zugang zu Domaindaten. [Read More]

» Whois-Zwischenberichte sind da from Wortfeld
ICANNs GNSO plant Kompromiss zur Nutzerdaten. [Read More]

Comments (3)

anon anon:

EnCirca says they will do it for free. See http://www.encirca.biz/html/whoisaccuracy.shtml

Posted by anon anon | February 24, 2004 1:57 PM

Posted on February 24, 2004 13:57

Ali F.:

Network Solutions has also started its new private registration. See the following link: http://www.networksolutions.com/en_US/name-it/private.jhtml?siteid=100&channelid=P68C100S1N0B2A1D231E0000V106&clickid=1000000000

Posted by Ali F. | February 24, 2004 4:32 PM

Posted on February 24, 2004 16:32

fnord:

You can add the big one, Thomas. NSI announced[http://www.internetprivacyadvocate.org/ProtectYourPersonalInfo.htm] a WHOIS anonymizer service a week or so ago and it is now [http://www.networksolutions.com/en_US/name-it/private.jhtml?siteid=100&channelid=P68C100S1N0B2A1D231E0000V106&clickid=1000000000] available at a cost of $5/yr. It bills itself as being more than a proxy service in that the registrant maintains full control and 'ownership'. I don't see this as much different from Godaddy's offering, the only one I'm familiar with. Now that NSI is doing such it will be interesting to see what, if any, stance ICANN will take in response. Western Samoa's .ws (which is marketed as standing for WebSite) also perhaps deserves mention. The WHOIS available [http://whois.samoanic.ws/whois.dhtml] from their registration site of IANA record [http://www.iana.org/root-whois/ws.htm] will only report whether or not the domain name is registered. Website.ws's WHOIS [http://website.ws/utilities/lookup.dhtml] is somewhat more helpful, if the domain is registered it gives only the registrant name and nameservers, and the option of requesting that the owner contact the requester, while logging the requester's IP and requiring the requester's email. A direct port 43 request only gives the name and nameserver info and states that use of the WHOIS for other than determining its availability for registration is strictly prohibited. This seems to be the default, that is, there is no additional charge for the proxy. I haven't read the fine print to see who is considered the 'owner'. The .ws WHOIS has been this reticent for well over a year. -g

Posted by fnord | February 24, 2004 6:07 PM

Posted on February 24, 2004 18:07

About