up vote 1 down vote favorite

Noob question.

If wikileaks had hosted their own DNS, would it be correct to say that nobody would be have been able to shut down (excluding the DDOS attacks) the wikileaks.org domain name like EveryDNS did?

link
Why isn't this on the parent site? – fahadsadah Dec 12 '10 at 18:02
@fahadsadah beats me. I'd suggest it doesn't really belong there either as its a "pie in the sky" question rather than actual problem solving. I voted to close and it didn't get enough votes from other people, which also puzzles me. It clearly doesn't belong here. – DJ Pon3 Dec 14 '10 at 21:26
where do think the best place to ask this question would have been? – Paul Sheldrake Dec 15 '10 at 11:30
Well it's a technical question so it definitely doesn't belong in meta (which is for questions about the site itself), so the main SF site is where it probably should have been posted. The bit that is controversial/based on my opinion, is that it doesn't even belong there as its not a "real" technical question. It's speculative rather than problem solving, and the sites are all about the problem solving. As I say, that last bit is just my opinion though. – DJ Pon3 Dec 15 '10 at 20:00
webmasters.stackexchange.com is probably a better fit. – JP19 Jan 13 '11 at 16:36
feedback

closed by John Gardeniers, Zypher♦ Jan 13 '11 at 15:51

See the FAQ for guidance on how to improve it.

4 Answers

up vote 0 down vote

Not in that way, anyway. EveryDNS shut them down for TOS violations. By self-hosting they couldn't be shut down for DNS TOS violations, though they could be shut down for violating the TOS of the hosting provider.

link
feedback
up vote 0 down vote

The registrar who controls the .com/.net/.org registry can also yank the whole domain name too.

link
feedback
up vote 0 down vote

Not really. The DNS server will have to be in somebody's datacenter and attached to somebody's network.

If the authorities asked for the DNS server to be shut down and the admin refused, they would just keep "going up the chain" so to speak until somebody did.

They'd ask the datacenter to take it offline, and if they didn't comply they'd get the datacenter's internet provider to shut the whole datacenter off.

The datacenter would ordinarily comply, as they have far too much to risk by not taking it offline - they'd probably be liable for hundreds of thousands of pounds in SLA breaches if their entire datacenter was taken offline.

link
feedback
up vote 0 down vote

Technically by doing this they will eliminate some of the targets i.e. DNS hosting company, however they still have to bass through the Root DNS servers owned and operated by ICANN , as most ISP's get their dns info from the root servers they can "remove" the domain. They could instead switch to an IP address instead of using a domain name or just start another "internet".

link
feedback

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged