Reply to post:

US government tells internet body to hurry the funk up on privacy

Doctor Syntax Silver badge

What ever happened to the good days of the "abuse@example.com"

Could you please direct me to the RFC that specifies the provision of an abuse address?

The most recent RFC I can find about whois (3912 from 2004) contains the entry

5. Security Considerations

The WHOIS protocol has no provisions for strong security. WHOIS lacks mechanisms for access control, integrity, and confidentiality.

Accordingly, WHOIS-based services should only be used for information which is non-sensitive and intended to be accessible to everyone.

The absence of such security mechanisms means this protocol would not normally be acceptable to the IETF at the time of this writing.

The most recent I can find which specifies content (RFC 1834 from 1995) lists only admin and tech contacts as required but there's no definition as to who fills these roles so there's nothing to say it couldn't be a registrar.

Perhaps it's time for a new RFC which reflects the requirements of the world as it is now - and takes into account the observation in 3912.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021