Posts tagged as:

private domain registration

Google cannot see past private registrations

by Carolyn Shelby on November 29, 2006

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

This whole “can Google see past/around private domain registrations” thing that came out of the Interactive SERP Site Review session at PubCon Vegas has been bothering me a little, not because I’m worried (because I’m not, okay? I’m not). But in the interest of furthering the academic discourse, I decided to do a little research.

I im’d a friend of mine who used to work for Moniker and asked if he had access to, or if anyone from the registrar side had access to, the WHOIS info on private domain registrations. His reply was that “only registrars have access to the private domain registration information, but only for those domains they hold/manage”.

So, Google, although a registrar, does not have access to anyone’s private WHOIS info because Google doesn’t manage or handle registrations for the general public.

To confirm this, I also read ICANN’s “Preliminary Task Force Report on Whois Services” issued on 22 November 2006. If you look under Summary of task force discussion (including proposals for access to data) you’ll see the following:

There are two different classes of requests for registration information.

1) Requests for information about registrations that are managed through a private registration or registration proxy service (a “type 1″ request)

2) Requests for information for regular, non-proxy/non-private registrations. (a “type 2″ request)

These requests are typically dealt with differently by registrars.

Requests are typically taken in by a single point of contact at a registrar which liaises with or escalates to the registrars legal department or staff.

There’s other information in the report, but that’s the part that I think is the most clear. It confirms what my contact said, which is that registrars have access to the registration data for private registrations, but only for the domains they manage.

So, Google cannot see past private registration protection. That being said, it doesn’t mean webmasters are not being profiled. It just means they aren’t using special, non-public information to build the profiles. (See comments to my previous post)

Just an update… I know I’ll sleep better tonight. ;)

Popularity: 52% [?]

{ 13 comments }

Update to the “Anything You Reg” Post

by Carolyn Shelby on November 22, 2006

I had the wonderful opportunity to participate in Shoemoney’s “Net Income” show on Webmaster Radio on Tuesday, November 21 (listen here if you are so inclined), and we discussed the session at PubCon where Matt Cutts did a quick clickety-click and suddenly knew about all 40+ of the reviewees registered domains, and gave him a little bit of a hard time about it.

What I had taken away from that was that Google is profiling webmasters, and when we hit a certain threshhold in terms of quantity and quality of domains registered, it flags us. Flags us as what? Okay, I don’t know that, and I’m fairly positive no one from Google is going to volunteer that information. However, I did speculate on the possible ramifications in my post the other day.

So on to the update…

Brian B., who was sitting with me at the session, commented on Matt Cutts’ recap and pointed out what I had suspected, which is that Google can see past privacy protection.

…you mentioned that you knew that this person owned 40+ sites, and afterwards when you clicked on the WhoIs info that they were all privacy protected. I think you just let it slip that Google has access to all the WhoIs info regardless of what is protected from public domain. That’s a pretty big statement to make and will probably make a lot of people nervous.

Um, yeah! Makes me nervous and I’m not even doing anything wrong. (I swear!) Matt replied to Brian and explained that he did not employ any voodoo or secret Google magic to determine that the domains the reviewee owned were all privacy protected… [click to continue...]

Popularity: 38% [?]

{ 4 comments }