It was mentioned before in this forum, and it happens daily:

The growth of domain owners who intentionally jump from host to host to avoid paying invoices, etc.

Someone suggested that a database should be created, to warn web hosts of domain names owners who make this a habitual practice.

A beta version of the "Host Abuse Registry" has been born, and is in the testing stages. It can be found at http://hostabuse.com

Any suggestions, criticizm, and comments are well appreciated.

I know that http://www.hostcoalition.org has something like that as well.

And to think I was justing thinking to myself a day or so ago what I good idea something like that would be *chuckle* I mean if you go to finance people, or department stores, buy stuff for a week, and return it for your money back, and then go get it from somewhere else and do the same over and over just to avoid paying for something, you *know* you're going to end up on a blacklist. So why should webhosting be any different. I for one will be more than happy to make use of a system designed to point these people out.

Odd thing is, everyone here knows the hassles involved in moving a domain. It's close to a week before a domain fully resolves itself. There's 24-48 hours usually to get accounts set up and cleared, and then some time to get an account closed as well. All up I'm guessing their domain is getting a clean run for 3/4 of the time, at best. The fact some people are willing to go through the hassle of moving house every month just to save a few bucks is staggering.

Never under-estimate the human race, as there's always some yahoo out there that will lower the bar even further.

Greg Moore

Originally posted by Mike

A beta version of the "Host Abuse Registry" has been born, and is in the testing stages. It can be found at http://hostabuse.com

Any suggestions, criticizm, and comments are well appreciated.

Mike,

You might consider putting a country field in your form... Not all of us are yankee-doodle-dandies. :)

Greg Moore


[Edited by akashik on 11-08-2000 at 02:24 AM]

If you need any assistance with this, especially in the area of development, let me know. I'd be happy to lend a hand.

Definately a great idea! If I were a web host, I would definately use that!

Nice effort. I would suggest getting rid of the "National" as it indicates provincial thinking. At the very least, you might mention which of the more than 240 nations on Earth it refers to.

Also, to be fair and effective, some kind of cross referencing to poor hosts must be a part of it. Otherwise, the site can be another way for hosts to abuse former customers. There may be perfectly valid reasons why someone dropped a host and left a bill unpaid. Considering the large number of disreputable hosts, it happens quite frequently.

The site is a worthwhile effort, though care must be taken to ensure that it doesn't live up to an alternate interpretation of its name.

I just don't get people who try to jump from host to host to abuse them. In reality (not ethical or unethical way), if you have a big site, moving from one to another is very hassle, and who would rather pay a few bucks than keeping worry about moving when the trial day comes to expire? Those people are so cheap and if they're just that, they'll never be successed. But don't include those people who want to to get experiences before settle down with a good one.

The people who run reputable businesses usually don't do this.

The one's you need to look out for are people who run high profile sites that tend to suck up a lot of bandwidth. It is pretty easy for them to keep switching companies. They sign up and 25 days later sign up for another host. Then, they just transfer the IP address pointers on their DNS. Usually takes only 12 hours if they are set up correctly, and can be quicker. Then they cancel from the first host and start the process all over again.

It is a nice scam, but it will eventually backfire.

Searchable is good, but having an alpha list would be good too.

Thank you all for your comments and suggestions - They will all be taken into consideration.

Perhaps I will add an alpha listing of all domains in the database, but I thought that may stir up a bit of controversy.

The idea is for hosts to check the domain name prior to opening the account, not really for general browsing.

In fact, we will implement code from which web hosts can query our database remotely. Hosts can add this code as a subroutine into current scripts (signup scritps) and get instant results sent to them via e-mail, etc.

Opinions?

Mike,

I just signed up on the site and noticed a lack of password checking (to make sure it was entered correctly). Yo might want to add a second password entry field to the login process and check it against the first).

I was unable to login. Perhaps I made a typo, or maybe approval is required before I can even login. Either way, something is not quite right.

Definately, the password confirmation will be added today! An oversight on my part.

Hello All,

After reading about this site here on the forums, I personally though it was a *great* idea. But I also had some concerns over the legality of it.

So, before I signed up, I sent a note over to my attorney asking his advice.

I am going to post his message, in it's entirety, here. Please take this only at face-value as a communication between my company and my company's attorney - your mileage may vary on this advice depending on your state's laws and other factors. But his reply gives me pause enough that I would like to share this.

This doesn't mean I won't be signing up for hostabuse.com, just that I and other hosts should be very cautious about how we use the site.

Here is my attorney's analysis:


Jason-

As a user turning down or deactivating a customer on the basis of a
negative report from hostabuse.com, you could find your company included
in a lawsuit if the negative report turned out to be erroneous. You could
reduce your risk by giving the customer a reasonable amount of time,
before you take action, to notify you if they dispute a negative report.

The flip side is more hazardous. If your own negative report on someone
turns out to be wrong, you could become a defendant in a lawsuit alleging
defamation, interference with advantageous relationships and woof woof
woof.

To limit your exposure, use extreme care (you're one typo away from
Court) and limit your comments to facts that you know to be true, not
opinions or assumptions. "We received no payment from XYZ.com for 3
months' service" is better than "XYZ did not send us any payment for 3
months" or "XYZ is a deadbeat". Maybe they claim that they sent a payment
that got lost. Maybe they can prove than they have an A+ credit rating
with Dun & Bradstreet. Caution rules here.

Related thought: does hostabuse.com have a procedure for retractions?

Les


So I suggest to all hosts who plan to use hostabuse.com that you do so cautiously.

That being said, I do think this will be an excellent and useful resource, as long as it is used properly.

Thanks,

Jason

There will be a full recourse for retraction, as well as domain name owner dispute. This should work exactly as a credit rating system.. Once a domain name owner disputes the validity of a hosts claim, the domain shall be removed from the registry until an investigation has been completed.. yada yada yada..

Etc...

Mike,

That sounds good. I have a suggestion (though I haven't run this one past my lawyer so I don't know if it's a good one or not), but you should create a graphic that participating hosting companies can place on their web site that will say "We Check all Signups through HostAbuse.com".

You might also create a form that people can check themselves if they have a negative listing (like people can for their own credit reports) rather than having to have people get turned down by a host and then have to try to correct things after that.

Just two ideas.

Oh, also, I would definitely support a browsable listing being added - although we'll probably run every signup through the system anyway, it would be helpful to be able to get a "feel" for who is entered in here, so that if a customer signs up with perhaps a different domain (or a variation on another domain) we could question that and do more research. For example, 6 or 8 months ago we had a spammer sign up with a domain name that was then terminated, and a few weeks ago that same person signed up with another hosting company using a slightly different domain name, but it was close enough so that had the owner of the hosting company had a browsable resource like hostabuse.com they might have been able to question it rather than having to react when that customer spammed from their site.

Thanks,

Jason

Excellent ideas - We have a logo already in creation.

But, I'm still hesitant about the browsable listing - I was thinking that more search options should be added (ie. Name of Owner, Addresses, Telephone Numbers, etc)

However, I do see why a full listing should be made available, for similar domain names. Definately something to think more about.

I agree whole-heartedly that the practice of hopping from one host to another just to avoid payment is unethical and -- hell, it's just downright sleazy.

However, I see a tremendous degree of latitude for abuse, right here, in the creation of such an entity.

Who's going to police this in the event of a disputation over a listing? And who is going to police the police?

How long will it take to settle such a dispute -- while one who is perhaps innocently accused is left hanging?

Most people leave a host for one of two reasons -- excessive downtime or lousy support. To my mind, it's just the sort of host guilty of such failings that is most likely to unjustly "blackball" a domain -- either out of incompetence or just plain spite.





[Edited by etLux on 11-10-2000 at 07:49 PM]

The registry will act as a "warning" to web hosts. It is still the hosts decision to setup the account. The registry alert will not prevent a domain account from being setup.

If, by some chance, a web host fraudently enters a domain name into the registry, domain owners have the right to dispute the claim. During this time, the domain will be immediately removed from the registry until an investigation is completed.

Literature, currently undergoing review by our attorney, is in the works for the web site.

Also, in the few days the site has been open, over 75 web hosts have registered.

You have not answered critical questions.

And the aura of privy knowledge and secrecy suggested by this is even more alarming and disturbing...

Originally posted by Mike
The idea is for hosts to check the domain name prior to opening the account, not really for general browsing... Hosts can add this code as a subroutine into current scripts (signup scritps) and get instant results...

What next? Secret handshakes? Decoder rings? Or perhaps long white robes and peaked hats? How is a domain owner to even know he or she has been added to the cabal's list of presumed undesirables until it is too late?

This is tantamount to conviction without trial. The fact that there is -- at least we suppose -- recourse after the damage is largely done is as comforting as being well dressed for the grave after exiting the gas chamber.

Who put whom up to this? Lawyers short of business? I assure you, this will generate ample litigation.

Hmm...

Ever apply for a credit card? Ever try to get a loan from a bank? Ever try to rent an apartment in a large complex, or even to write a check at the local grocery store?

If so, I guarantee you that all of those places check lists similar to these. Credit cards and banks check listings from credit bureaus, apartment complexes check listings of people who've ever been evicted (these lists are a matter of public record in most states, since it takes court action to be evicted and court records are public), and grocery store chains maintain lists of everyone who's ever bounced a check with that chain.

This is not in the slightest bit unusual, and in none of these cases (with the possible exception of the eviction issue) would you ever be notified you are on that list unless or until it causes you to be turned down for something because of it.

It's not the slightest bit unusual. And, as noted, the hosts do not automatically turn away a customer because of this listing.

Potential litigation? Sure - but what lawyer in his right mind is going to take up a court case over a $19.95 a month web hosting account?

Jason

Because it is not unusual does not make it right.

Nazi Germany is a fine historical example.

etLux,

I think you're overreacting a bit. I do share your concerns for accuracy, and they were paramount to my own post on this issue. However, it is well within the rights of hosts to share information on those who default on payment and steal services.

Jason's mention of credit bureaus is a good example on many levels. It is an example of such sharing of information. At the same time, it is also an example of why accuracy is so important. The level of false information in many credit reports is horrendous. The bureaus themselves estimate that over 50% of reports have bogus information in them. In the U.S., the Fair Credit Reporting Act covers redressing errors and most merchants use one or more of the 3 major credit bureaus.

The effects of Host Abuse will be more limited.

I'd say you just hung yourself with your own argument, Duster... lol.

No, I'd say it proves the point about accuracy being so important.

This is just a suggestion, but it seems like it should be searchable by domain name and name/address.

If reputable businesses are not the ones that abuse web hosts, then it will be people who have either small businesses or fan/personal/hobby type sites.

If that is the case, if they find out their name is in the database, and they are low on morals anyway, why not just register a new domain name for $14.00 in five minutes and be done with it? The way the site is now, it would not come up a match, unless there is some other type of checking.

Also, I think that the hosts using the site should clearly specify that all accounts are checked through hostabuse.com, with a link to the site. When you do checking behind someone's back, you are asking for a law suit. This way it may deter the average "cheater" because he knows he is going to be checked and he knows he did this type of activity before. If a large majority of the "good hosts" sign up and place the hostabuse.com logo on their sites, it will force them to either go somewhere else, or register additional domain names...which is why there should be an alternate method of checking.

Another thing...what if the domain expires and the person who original had the domain is not the person who holds the domain now? Another reason to cross check.

Just my two cents. :)

Per my prior comments, I'd like to make it as clear as possible that I in no way condone the dishonest and abusive practice of skipping from host to host to avoid paying what one rightfully owes.

My primary -- indeed, only -- concern, here, is for the innocently accused who can so easily get caught in such a system. If you've ever had a bank refuse you a mortgage based on baldly inaccurate credit reports, you will know exactly to what I refer. The litigative costs of rectifying such an error can be enormous; and the time required to do so, lengthy.

So here, the parallels… the potential for a spiteful host to list an otherwise blameless domain; the error of a good but tired host who mistypes or confuses a domain name; the innocent buyer of a domain name whose prior owner was a scoundrel -- all of these (and undoubtedly more, with thought) pretense the possibility of the faultless being caught in a mire that can be costly financially and to their reputations, as well as time-consuming to unravel and correct.

There are far too many instances of this with extant services such as credit bureaus, the private lists shared amongst banks and credit card companies, and other such practices already in situ.

At the very least, such an organization should aspire to be more honorable than these sad examples, and mandate that participating hosts provide immediate and specific notice and disclosure to anyone rejected from their services as a result of being listed thereon.

As I noted in a previous post (and I think Mike confirmed), there absolutely needs to be a way for customers to contest the information in there.

I think that any host using hostabuse.org needs to state that on their signup page, *and* any time a host turns away a customer because of a listing in hostabuse.org they need to inform the customer that that is the reason they have been turned away (much like a bank does when turning down a loan due to a credit report).

Hosts also should notify customers at the time they are added to the database to let them know.

Of course, every host must develop their own policies, but here are mine:

1) Any customer whose account is terminated for spamming will be added to hostabuse.com immediately.

2) Any customer whose account is terminated due to a credit card charge-back will be added hostabuse.com immediately.

3) Customers who have defaulted on payment will be added to hostabuse.com *only* after all collections efforts have failed (we typically do a 90-day series of collection attempts on any amount over about $20), and a note will be included in the final collection notice that the customer will be added to the hostabuse.com database.

4) If a customer whom we have added to the database later contacts us to ask that we remove them from the database, we will do so *if* the customer pays their past due balance. In addition to removing that entry from the hostabuse.com database, we will also (at the customer's request) send a note to their new web host (or whatever web host turned them down due to the listing) saying that the customer cleared their past debt. This one, of course, only applies to customes who fit #2 and #3 above, not spammers.

5) We will not add customers to the hostabuse.com for violations of our Terms of Service (except those who violate the anti-SPAM provisions of course), since every company's TOS is slightly different and (for example) we might kick someone out for repeatedly (after numerous warnings) continuing to store e-mail on the server for long periods of time, whereas other hosts might not have a problem with that practice at all.

Now, those are our own policies - but it might certainly be appropriate for hostabuse.com to set up policies of their own.

This web site still has a lot of work to be done - I think people need to be able to request a copy of any complaints against them, and I also think that there needs to be automated ways to remove listings (just like there is automated ways to add them).

But this type of site is a long time in coming, and I definitely think there is a large need for this, as long as the site is administered in a fair and equitable manner.

Jason

For my own enlightenment (and perhaps that of others), how prevalent is the practice of "host hopping" for sake of non-payment? How many instances of this are hosts seeing, and how much is involved in real dollars?

By the way, I applaud the general idea of adding domains to an abuse-tracking list for spamming -- you should see my support mail every morning; it takes an hour to clean it out.

However, again, my caution about verifying the truth of such an accusation.

It would seem that maybe a 'terms and conditions' type of page would be needed at the host abuse site to state what is acceptable when adding someone to the database. We all impose these terms so it's obvious why they are a good thing. It would make things clearer for everyone using it, and promote the reason it should be used, rather than just as a sledging post for disgruntled hosts. Also maybe next to each trouble-maker could be a reason for their addition. For example the spamming, or domain hopping would be something everyone would see and look out for. However, if they were banned for MP3 storage, or IRC bots, or storing mail etc, which was in violation of a TOS, this might be something that other people would find acceptable. Maybe a 'hit count' of how often this person has offended, aliases that have been discovered etc...

I know this is starting to make the system sound huge and unwieldy, but a fuller profile of the offenders might aid in a fairer system. A one time offender is bad, but not as bad as a repeat offender.

Not every host will discover and use the system straight away so these people will still domain hop etc. In time other hosts will find hostabuse, realize they were ripped off by someone already listed, and will be able to add their 'hit' to a profile already there. In time and with some detective work, profiles of certain people will come to the front of the serial hoppers, spammers, and creditcard frauders.

It might help out a little with the possible legal angle too, as people will be able to see they are not being lumped in with the worst of the worst.

Greg Moore

For my own enlightenment (and perhaps that of others), how prevalent is the practice of "host hopping" for sake of non-payment? How many instances of this are hosts seeing, and how much is involved in real dollars?

I just ran down through all of our collections files, and right now we have 19 accounts totalling $2828.24 that are in some stage of collections. Now, how many of these were intentionally host-hopping and how many simply didn't bother to pay, I honestly couldn't say, but I would suggest that if they didn't pay us, they probably won't pay their next web host, either.

So yes, this is a very real problem.

Jason

This is a complex moral/commercial discussion, however I am aware from being approached by someone involved, that the general 'user' public is currently compiling a 'mother of all bad service providers list' at this very moment.

Curious.

This will highlight ISP's/Hosting "companies" etc (international too)

So, it will be interesting to see the cross over 'us' versus 'them' that might ensue....

etLux counsels well on this matter.

Well it seems fair enough as the clients need the information to make an informed decision when selecting a host. One would think they already have that though... With forums like this, and the plethora of host search pages, which are mostly user driven (besides the skewed advertsing slant) what would this new one offer? I'm pretty interested in anything that provides good solid information about the net so I'd love to hear what this 'new' one is all about. Hosting only, or ALL sorts of services? Bad Dail-ups, hosting, webdesign, programmers, email services, opt-in's, spam merchants offering 'hook' products? etc. I'd imagine you could fill a site pretty quick if you cover the whole gauntlet of shady, sleazy, corrupt liars out there online :)

Greg Moore

Well, I think it is exciting watching this industry evolve.

This is all just an example of that process.

Should I suggest that the person/s involved would be well served by visiting this forum? I know they haven't yet.

Maybe an owner/moderator can advise?

I believe that the actual number of people who use online services, in all their forms, is enormous in comparison with the actual number of people who visit the directories and forums.

Think of all the 'local' ISP's/Hosters around the world that first reach their customers via traditional media.

Originally posted by felix220
Should I suggest that the person/s involved would be well served by visiting this forum? I know they haven't yet.

I tell everyone to stop by and check it out. Great resource for just about anyone involved in this industry.

I was wondering how many hosts here give away a free month of hosting during the first month?

I was re-reading this thread, and wondered how many "cheaters" you would get doing a deal like that to promote your business/build your customer base.

Are those types of plans successful?

That is the exact reason we do not give a free first month of hosting, too many spammers would sign up. We get alot of spammers signing up just because we don't have a set up fee too, I just deleted poilkjmnbqaz.com today because I received a ton of email complaints this morning, the guy signed up yesterday and he spent all last night sending out unsolicited emails.


These types of people are even willing to pay 1 month of hosting from us just to spam for one night, we get a few of those, they don't even try to chargeback or anything, just another business expense to them i guess.


Anyone know a good way to discourage those people more without raising prices?

I agree with Greg on this one. A free month of hosting as an inducement to sign sounds good -- but apparently, the tactic he describes of signing up, spamming, and splitting is a very common one. Offering a free month of hosting would just make amy hosting company offering it an instant Mecca for every spammer on the planet.

And, no, I have no good solution for stopping the practice. I wish I did. I get a ton of this junk every day -- and when you run an active support department like ours, well, you simply don't have the luxury of dumping any incoming mail without looking at it at least quickly.

I think the practice of giving away a months free hosting is a good practice to help increase your userbase as long as you do it correctly.

Simple example,
Signup today, stay with us for three months and your fourth months hosting is on us.

If explained properly on why you do this instead of giving out one month free in the beginning most people that are trying to do legitimate business on the net would understand.

If I thought that a host was giving away the first month free to any Jane Dick or Harry that came along and that any Jane Dick or Harry could then use up say 90% of the systems resources one afternoon, perhaps on the afternoon that my site is most busy, and it blocked people from using my site or service because they have used up so many resources, then I'd be more than willing to not signup with them on the basis that my site could go down at any given time because of Jane Dick or Harry.

Does that make sence?

There are a lot of services out there that have that practice, and Im personally thinking about adopting it for our hosting business. I think that would entice people to signup more if you explain why you do it that way.

My other thoughts are on the 30 day money back guarantee that most people give out, how many people do you get that go host hopping because of this? I would imagine that there are a lot of people out there that are willing to move their sites to another host every 27 days to avoid paying, while I have implemented the 30 day guarantee, I am seriously thinking about switching it to 7 days to avoid people signing up and switching hosts on the 29th day, if you give them 7 days, they have more than ample time to check out your support, and the behaviors of the server and make up their minds in 7 days whether or not you are any good. And by only offering 7 days guarantee, you are eliminating a large crowd of people that wont signup that would have switched every 29days because it really isn't practical to move to a host and then switch in 6 days, since it takes anywhere from 48 hours to 7 days to fully propegate a domain name across the entire net.

Just my 2 cents from a still newbie, or have I made enough quality posts to join the ranks of the next stage. ;)

Bbox

Brainbox: I can understand your concerns with the 30-day money back guarantee. For what it's worth, though, we haven't ever had a problem with "host hoppers". The worst problem we've had is with a couple spammers signing up over the years. There's really nothing you can do about them, except shut them down in a hurry.

QWK.Net has recently begun offering a "first month free" deal, so we'll see how it works out. I think we have enough protections in place to scare most abusers off. It's only for credit card customers, and we require a signed credit card authorization on all credit card accounts. (Customers don't seem to mind this, and it really helps our position a lot in defending the inevitable, occasional chargeback.)

Well, I guess we got the first case of "host hoppers"...

A guy bought a package over a month ago for the domain mor***.*** . Stayed for less than a month then emailed us to cancel the account. No explainations or any reasons or even a sigle email from him during that time. In any case, a refund was issued back to him for that month even though he did not request it.

Out of Curiosity, I checked his domain for the last 3 weeks and to my surprise, he change hosting twice more.. and the 2 other webhosts offered moneyback guarantee as well.

So, after reading this thread here, it makes me wonder if we should offer money back guarantee any more or if it was a bad idea to start with.

Originally posted by Joana
So, after reading this thread here, it makes me wonder if we should offer money back guarantee any more or if it was a bad idea to start with. It's a marketing decision. If you're convinced that most people won't have real reasons to ask you for their money back, the only reason you're doing it is so that you can advertise that you do; promote it as a positive thing. Like any other piece of your marketing program, it will have a cost: the amount of money you'll have to refund even though your company really isn't at fault.

So try to determine whether the sales that you get because of that guarantee are worth more than the cost of offering it.

I think the positives of a 30 day money back outweighs the negatives. The one month free thing though, hmm, perhaps a free time limited and resource account? For example, no mail, and a 30 day limit (my choice would be 2 weeks) on the account before it's automatically killed off?

With something like that, you wouldnt need a 30 day money back or a one month free deal.

As for hostabuse, I'd be for it if the system does a lookup and auto email on submission. I mean, the system should do a whois on the reported domain, pull the admin email listed, and email a report to the domain holder. The report should tell them when, why, and by whom they were reported. It should also cc a copy of that to the host that filed the report. The report should also provide help as for resolving the dispute.