That was a common racket a long time ago, but pretty much every widely recommended registrar offers free whois privacy now. At least when they're allowed to, some TLDs forbid obfuscating the whois information.
a little less than a year ago, my wife registered a .us domain that she ended up not using at all. she still gets phone calls nearly daily from people trying to sell her web design/dev work
I have two .in domains with namecheap and whois data is all "REDACTED FOR PRIVACY" despite namecheap not allowing me to add domain privacy when I purchased the domains.
I’ve looked into it a bit more, and turns out there are two options for redacting WHOIS data:
- “Privacy service”, which is these funky named LLCs replacing your data in the WHOIS
- Just the redaction, which replaces almost all data with REDACTED FOR PRIVACY (except for registrant's country, state, and organization name).
No idea why or how any of this works! Apparently, Porkbun does both: on my another domain, aedge.dev, it shows REDACTED FOR PRIVACY and replaces org name with “Private by Design, LLC”. For notpushk.in, it does show my country (RU... looks like I haven’t updated my address in a while lol) but everything else is redacted, too.
Spaceship on the other hand doesn’t bother and returns only this tiny response:
Domain Name: lunni.dev
Registry Domain ID: 4AF9AE073-DEV
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.nic.google
Registrar URL: None
Updated Date: 2025-03-10T13:01:35Z
Creation Date: 2022-12-11T02:30:54Z
Registry Expiry Date: 2025-12-11T02:30:54Z
Registrar: Spaceship, Inc.
Registrar IANA ID: 3862
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse@spaceship.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.6027723958
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Name Server: coco.bunny.net
Name Server: kiki.bunny.net
DNSSEC: unsigned
URL of the ICANN Whois Inaccuracy Complaint Form: https://www.icann.org/wicf/
>>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2025-03-17T17:11:09Z <<<
Edit: or, rather, that’s what whois.nic.google returns for a domain registered in Spaceship.
According to German law every website who is owned and operated by a person or entity in Germany needs an imprint with full name, address, email address and phone number… (of the owner 2 owning entity)…
a) This is only for commercial websites although what counts as commercial is vague and probably not something you want to argue in court so it's safer to just add it unless you are absolutely sure.
b) You need a valid postal address where you can receive mail but this doesn't have to be your home address. A PO box is fine.
c) You don't need to have a phone number in your Imprint.
The base requirement of commercial operations having to have valid contact information (that can be used for legal communication) is pretty sensible. The details could be a bit friendlier towards individuals running purely personal sites.
So this in practice is a massive push to centralization: if you have a Facebook page or Instagram account, you don't need to risk that level of privacy compromise.
At the same time, expecting that your NAP info isn't already in the hands of anyone who wants it makes no sense in this day and age.
Between the countless DB leaks and numerous infostealer campaigns, and considering that anyone who has you in their contacts list is extending the exposed surface area, it's untenable. Other events like marriage and home ownership further complicate any attempt to keep your name and address private.
Not saying you shouldn't opt for domain privacy, just giving a reality check. To really enforce your privacy you have to have multiple phone lines and a shell company, at the least. And really, even that isn't enough unless you can also commit to being a hermit.
There is a tangible difference between some people having this data somewhere out there, and literally anyone who wants to have it being able to look it up in a few seconds using tools already installed on almost every computer anywhere.
The ability to look up the correct contact details for a commercial enterprise on that enterprise's website is a good thing imo. It is (or was) part of the EU requirements for commercial websites (anything selling, giving purchase advice, advertising, ...).
It's a useful filter, a seller without identifiable people and location is a big red flag.
Exactly. All their info was scraped long ago. Whois and abuse info, it all needed to be depreciated a few decades ago. But, pity the poor fool who actually contacts me. I treat them like regular scammers. Get all the info, and then tell them to pound dirt.
Except for the guy who tried to sell me annuity liquidation. Yes, if the person gets unalived earlier than expected, you win.
In related news, I saw someone buy $150 worth of lottery tickets, as I was on the way to a large hospital to visit a sick friend. The lottery guy I am sure lost, and the hospital guy (profit-care) won, while the ward was understaffed( a profit-center). And 7 out of 8 fare collection machines were out of order ( deferred maintenance as a profit-center). I get the distinct feeling that corporate America, just does not even care in the slightest.
For the organization that managed the WhoIs? The horse left the barn so long ago, it's great great great grand-children are old and gone. Long gone.
Laws are crazy. The CAN SPAM act requires you to publish a physical mailing address in the email you send. It was an anachronism even when it was originally passed -- who wants to unsubscribe to email via physical mail? And yet it's still there, for no reason.
you just have to have enough money to have some legal entity register on your behalf and that legal entity then has their system spammed, but they have their phone public anyhow...
the idea is to have individuals accountable while not annoying owners.
in that sense it makes _perfect_ sense and works as intended.
a proper solution ingredient would be trustworthy and affordable pseudonymity, and that can be lifted by court orders only. but then who guarantees the independence of courts? and the fairness of laws?
I don't understand why people aren't using fake addresses for registering domains. I've had a few registered to 1001 Main St in my local town and a made up phone number for over 10 years now with no issue. Main Street will never be over 40 addresses for the foreseeable future and I can just update the record if need be.
So .us is more trustworthy than .com. Good to know.
Im one of those that think that developers are hiding too much, which makes things like vs code extension viruses rampant.
I wont force you to not be anonymous, but if you are going to run your software on my device I want some accountability. Our salaries should also reflect that.
So far I haven't encountered a single actual virus, and if you're referring to the recent Material Theme debacle, there was never any malicious code involved, only third party libraries with obfuscation.
> So .us is more trustworthy than .com. Good to know.
Be careful about concluding things like that.
The TLD has a requirement that you publish your info. That doesn't mean they have any way of verifying it. If someone could prove that the info was false then they might lose the domain, but they also lose the domain if someone can prove that they're operating a scam. So the scammers just make up fake info and all the requirement is doing is impacting the privacy of honest people who want a .us domain.
I think I understand your point, but your wording leaves some ambiguity. If I am running my software on your device you must be a cloud provider. In that case, the accountability you are looking for is probably not provided in the same way it would be if you were running my software on your device.
Either way, your aversion to anonymity of developers is interesting. It's a discussion for a different thread, but I think an important one.
It would be nice to find such a thread. This is a pet peeve of mine.
It’s one thing if you have a PO Box, and it’s consistently used in your various documents and registrations. I get wanting a firewall to direct availability.
But if I can barely find evidence you exist other than your software, or if you operate a fairly large scale service and you haven’t filed a yearly required corporate report (a specific example I recently came across), then those are red flags to me. Not immediate showstoppers necessarily, but if you’re trying to get me to make a purchase, I probably won’t.
It’s fine if you have domain privacy turned on, but you’re selling me software or services you have got to offer some kind of evidence that you have some kind of business nexus someplace. In a business context, I’ve got to know that for avoiding sanctions violations at the least.
A lot of effort has been spent studying trust. I'm not clear how a PO Box creates trust.
How do you trust that food from McDonalds is safe? How do you trust that Samsung hasn't empowered parties to control the mic on your phone? How do you trust Wells Fargo to hold your deposits? How do you trust the kennel to walk your dog?
Trust is really really hard. So a lot of people choose to adopt a zero trust philosophy.
Except they still eat at McDonalds and buy Samsung and bank at Wells Fargo. But they drop their dog off with Aunt Lawana now, instead of the commercial kennel.
Do you remember when Sony installed rootkits? Do you remember when Windows got compromised every 5th day for two years straight? Do you remember when HP broke every HP printer with a firmware update? Do you remember when the whole world got put on pause because an "anti" malware software pushed a flawed update? Do you remember when a certain credit-rating bureau got breached and exposed the PII of, well, everybody?
Do you remember that every one of these companies went on to post record profits?
Dear User,Our system has identified an unpaid toll charge linked to your vehicle. To avoid additional fees or service disruptions, please settle this matter within 12 hours.
Best of luck trying to get an unknown Chinese registrar to stop their spam. My carrier does not even have a clue. My routers now block anything *.Xin. Anything and everything.
