News:

"Wings and a Prayer [L-E]"
Congratulations OfferedToEros & Random for completing your RP!

Main Menu

Bank of America buying up hundreds of abusive domain names

Started by Vekseid, December 23, 2010, 03:51:38 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Vekseid

http://domainnamewire.com/2010/12/20/bank-of-america-wants-you-to-know-its-executives-dont-suck/

Quote
Company defensively registers hundreds of domain names for its senior executives and board members.

As Bank of American awaits a possible release of information from WikiLeaks, it wants to ensure that you don’t think its executives suck. Or blow for that matter.

The company has been aggressively registering domain names including its Board of Directors’ and senior executives’ names followed by “sucks” and “blows”.

For example, the company registered a number of domains for CEO Brian Moynihan: BrianMoynihanBlows.com, BrianMoynihanSucks.com, BrianTMoynihanBlows.com, and BrianTMoynihanSucks.com. Just to be sure, it also picked up the .net version of these names and some .orgs as well.

I count hundreds of such domain name registrations on December 17 alone. They were registered through an intermediary that frequently registers domain names on behalf of large companies.

Some of the other names are for CFO Charles Noski, Chairman of the Board Charles Holliday, and board member Charles Rossotti (who is also Senior Advisor, The Carlyle Group).

I’m not sure if this strategy will work. You can always go register BrianMoynihanBlows.info.

If this has anything to do with any of them personally being involved in fraudulent foreclosures, or worse, I would suggest to the folks at Bank of America that the words 'sucks' and 'blows' is not the apogee of English vulgarity. With most people using search engines these days, it's far more likely that someone will take off with something along the lines of 'Brian Movnihan Chokes on Four Gallons of Horse Chum per Day'.

Which may be rather insulting to bestiality aficionados.

I'll have to think of something better.

Oniya

If only I had the spare cash to register something like that.

Then I'd hold it for ransom, or something.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Callie Del Noire

Makes me wonder what is on that drive that Wikileaks is holding hostage.

kylie

        Not sure how much these things cost, but it's kind of funny either way...

        I don't see how they imagine they can really cover the gamut of possibilities.  All one has to do is put in an underscore here, a dash there, or yes use more colorful language.  Are they hiring focus panels to imagine the full range of simply "common" insults and just how much are they spending on this...  It's like the PR version of chasing tunneling rodents with the hammer.

       
     

Scribbles

If anything they've basically challenged whoever reads that article to find a loophole. Now they have a number of bored, web-savvy, types (along with their potential detractors) to worry about.
AA and OO
Current Games: Stretched Thin, Very Little Time

Vekseid

.com/.net/.org cost about $10/year each, but registrars that do this sort of thing for brand protection (like MarkMonitor) cost more. Someone would have to do a registrar lookup and pick it out, but they're spending thousands at a minimum and millions is not out of the question.

Sabby

I'm not quite sure I understand... why are they doing this?

Oniya

It's a preemptive action to keep disgruntled customers (and/or ex-employees) from getting the domain name and putting up an anti-'Bank of America' site.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Trieste


Star Safyre

#9
Quote from: Trieste on December 27, 2010, 12:54:01 PM
I have to wonder who thought this was a good idea.

A good idea?  Maybe.  It might preemptively shut down any obvious sites for critical discussion.

An effective idea?  Good God, no!  Do they not have any idea how many hidey-holes there are on the internet?

It's like a teacher I knew that tried to outlaw dirty words in her classroom.  Individually.  On a on-spoken basis.  It devolved into pretty much every student asking, "Miss, can I say ____?"  "No."  "Can I say _____?"  "No!"  "...But I just did."
My heaven is to be with him always.
|/| O/O's / Plots / tumblr / A/A's |/|
And I am a writer, writer of fictions
I am the heart that you call home
And I've written pages upon pages
Trying to rid you from my bones

Vekseid

Quote from: Oniya on December 27, 2010, 12:34:56 PM
It's a preemptive action to keep disgruntled customers (and/or ex-employees) from getting the domain name and putting up an anti-'Bank of America' site.

No,
http://bankofamericasucks.com already leads to a forum where ex-employees and so on are posting.

The suspicion is that this dump is specifically going to incriminate a single executive, so they're buying up the domains for the executives in an attempt to protect their reputation.

kylie

Quote...aggressively registering domain names including its Board of Directors’ and senior executives’ names...

       So in order not to spill the beans about which executive they're trying to marginally protect this way, they have to pay to cover sites for the whole senior management.  Is that what this all means?
     

Vekseid


Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Vekseid on December 29, 2010, 09:37:05 PM
They probably don't know whose hard drive it is.

Or they are using a bunch of names to divert suspsion.. or the material contained on the drive might have a 'splatter' factor to it.

kylie

        Some of these threads might use a little more backstory...

        I had to Google to see where this all started, in the news at least.  There's no reference to "hard drive" in the OP article.
     

Vekseid

Ahh sorry.

In two separate Interviews, Assange revealed that 1) He had major incriminating evidence against the Bank of America and 2) That he had 5 gigabytes of data from the hard drive of a major US bank executive, and that it would be revealed early next year.

Given the way Julian was talking about how this is endemic to the entire financial sector, I wouldn't be surprised if it also included evidence of collusion.

kylie

        I found some coverage on it here: 

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/12/22/2537580/all-eyes-on-bank-of-america-as.html

        I believe I also saw that Assange claims to have data from more than one financial institution.  Can someone verify that? 

       In the above, I do notice he didn't specifically name that one with the 5gb in question.  Other banks are reportedly acting uncomfortable about the prospect of the next release, in some ways that I'm not sure have been specified.  Apart from freezing funds or acting defensive with regard to Wikileaks, I mean.  Given how interconnected the world financial system is and given how big BoA is, I'm not sure that is particularly surprising...     

     There's a critical shot at Bank of America's PR responses here.  Includes a handy run-down of some of the major articles in the story (with links):

http://www.cnbc.com/id/40471184/Bank_of_America_s_Risky_WikiLeaks_Strategy
     

Shjade

Disclaimer: I don't follow much news, really. I know almost zero about Wikileaks and Assange.

Thus, taking this basically out of context, Assange's statement seems a lot like the setup for blackmail/extortion to me.
Theme: Make Me Feel - Janelle Monáe
◕/◕'s
Conversation is more useful than conversion.

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Shjade on January 02, 2011, 01:25:14 PM
Disclaimer: I don't follow much news, really. I know almost zero about Wikileaks and Assange.

Thus, taking this basically out of context, Assange's statement seems a lot like the setup for blackmail/extortion to me.

Essentially that is the feel I get for it. That he's hoping whatever 'poison pill' he has will scare enough folks in the banking industry to pressure the Feds to keep from coming to get him (though they have no actual standing to get him, Senator Lieberman aside)

Zakharra

 If he does that, they can nail him for blackmail and extortion, since that's exactly what it is, if Assange said that and is planning to do it. I think that is an actionable crime internationally too.

Callie Del Noire

I'm still not sure it's a US count though. It would have to be prosecuted within the country that he made the 'statement' originally. And since he didn't NAME an specific institution personally, there is very little that can be done since there is no specifically named party to come forward to press charges.

Till he actually comes out and releases the data, and/or names specific corporate entities, officers or other such elements he's merely 'making statements'. No one has been named as of yet, so the threat has no direction as yet.

IE. Till he ACTUALLY comes out and does it, he's just 'blowing hot air'.

Vekseid

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on January 02, 2011, 02:27:45 PM
Essentially that is the feel I get for it. That he's hoping whatever 'poison pill' he has will scare enough folks in the banking industry to pressure the Feds to keep from coming to get him (though they have no actual standing to get him, Senator Lieberman aside)

That wouldn't explain BofA's seeming complete and utter ignorance of it, though.

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Vekseid on January 03, 2011, 04:41:59 PM
That wouldn't explain BofA's seeming complete and utter ignorance of it, though.

True but then since when has the boss' decisions had to make sense to folks on the street? (whether they do/or don't make sense at all_)

Sandman02

The fact that Bank of America immediately responded by taking a defensive posture and then buying up these domain names seems to be a tacit confession that they really do think that certain sensitive has been compromised.

Right?

If not, then Bank of America is doing it solely out of sheer idiocy.

Vekseid

Well that they're buying domains for a random set of executives seems to suggest that they consider the threat at least somewhat credible, and don't have many ideas about what the contents are besides a very thoughtful analysis of publicly available information.