Moniker helped in domain theft...

[Adapt Web]

I really cant see how any of the blame falls on you.. Like any of us would, you trusted the Moniker/Snapnames integrated backend. They need to make this right to you, if they cant get the name back, I'd seek damages.

[ohkus]

Could it be related to this?

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/low...s/20090721.htm

Doubt it....Bari has been notified of the situation......so have a few others, lets see what pans out.

[BLazeD]

This is absolutely shocking. I would be livid.

[WebsiteTraders.Com]

they need to get ur names back or pay ASAP

[Poohnix]

They failed to act and gave the theives enough time to steal the domain? And now gone silent?

I wouldn't say "Gone silent", even though I've still to hear anything from anyone on the Moniker side. From Snapnames, the times I've received updates, (false information in them, but updates), it has been from someone named Jonathan Stanfill. I don't know who that is. I have, as mentioned, CC:d some of my responses to my Moniker rep, Don Lyons, but no response from him.
Now I didn't get any update at all yesterday - no response at all from anyone since I pointed out, for the second time, that the domain really wasn't at moniker any more, but at Directi. As mentioned, someone apparently did something yesterday, since they again tried to set the privacy on the domain, (but of course failed), apparently not believing the domain wasn't in their control even if they could see it themselves if bothering with checking the whois, and then, later, the domain disappeared from my Moniker account again. Of course it didn't matter if it was in the account, since Moniker isn't the registrar any more.

Quite a troubling story, never even considered the possibility of this happening. I suppose it was a paypal/credit card payment that was reversed? Surely if you email Moniker ( Monte directly ) and ask for his assitance as in supply the account info, he should!
Also what were the names so we can watch for them.

I don't understand how it could be a PayPal or Credit Card payment. The amount was for 12,900, and I don't think they accept other than wire transfers for that kind of amounts. In all cases, if they accept something else, it's their responsibility to make sure the payment is secured before transferring the domain out. If they accept non-secure payment methods, it should be on their risk, not mine.

The domain name in question is UIX.com. The second name was completely recovered, apparently noone tried to transfer that from Moniker, so I'm in control of that. (This also indicates that it wasn't the same culprit for both names. In fact, I'm not at all convinced there was anything wrong with the second sale at all, I think they just reversed that just in case...)

I'm a bit split about having to contact Monte. Noone should have to do that to get the service one deserve. It's a disgrace for Moniker that over and over again things aren't solved unless Monte or another account rep (not my own) is contacted here on the forum. I should get the same help even if I wasn't a member here, and didn't know who to contact.
Besides that, I have contacted Don Lyons several times. He also posts here sometimes, and he is my account rep.
If Monte wants to contact me, he is free to do so.

Yes folks, Nigerian Monte is live and well...

I don't know what your problem with Moniker is, but your way of handling it is seriously damaging your own cause. I'm serious here.

Very troubling to hear this. I have some of my most valuable names with moniker. I cannot have something like this happen.

I doubt anything would have happened unless I had trusted their sales platform and procedures when selling. Just keeping domains in Moniker appears fairly safe - yet.

The ball was dropped about SIX TIMES, if everything reported is true.

Completely unacceptable. Moniker needs to reimburse this guy from their OWN pocket for his loss right away, and unless they can come up with compelling proof that this will never happen again, EVERYONE needs to pull their domains off Moniker NOW.

Since when is it acceptable to ignore urgent customer requests for DAYS while a domain is in the process of being stolen???

I agree, and if this isn't solved soon, that's what I will demand. From the moment I submitted the names for sale I was completely in the hands of Moniker/Snapnames/Oversee.net and their procedures - and their routines weren't safe enough.
On top of that their claims were clearly not true, claiming the domain was locked down immediately when the payment was reversed. If it had been, the domain wouldn't have been transferred out three days later.
I don't think they locked it until it was too late, when they finally read my ticket... (The Snapnames tickets - noone locked anyting the day before when Moniker responded "We are determining what happened"... )

A couple of days ago I received an inquiry from a Moniker rep about another name - apparently someone had contacted them asking about that domain - and I gave him a quote and told him that if Moniker were to be some part of a domain transaction, in an escrow function or similar, that I would not enter into a deal unless they guaranteed the money themselves before transferring the domain out. From now on, I won't accept any other arrangement.

Could it be related to this?

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/low...s/20090721.htm

I strongly doubt it. They they wouldn't have to go via the Moniker/Snapnames sales platform, reverse payments, etc, but just take the domain directly from the account.


Another thing in this that is quite a scare - I asked what would have happened if I had used the funds from the sales to buy other domains at Snapnames before the payment was reversed. I had to ask this several times before receivng a reply:
"If you had used funds from your account for domain purchases, you would have had to pay for them by other means."

So - not only would they assist someone in stealing a domain name - they would demand that I paid for it!

There is another question, really... Snapnames don't allow funds from sales to be cashed out until 7 days after the sale. Is this because they think the payment may be reversed?
If so, how come Moniker/Snapnames transfer the domain out immediately?
If they really believe the payment may be reversed, they should wait the same time before transferring the domain out, and give the seller access to the funds at the same time the buyer gets access to the domain.

I don't know if it's false hope or not, but since the domain still points to my name servers, it could indicate that the fraudster isn't in full control of the domain either, and that I perhaps may get the domain back, eventually.
But it could also be that the guy just haven't changed them.

I still wonder what I'm supposed to respond to the person sending an inquiry about the domain a couple of days ago, with an offer that I consider good enough to negotiate further... But I can't, as long as I'm not in control of the domain.

[GUA]

I think that is time to tally what Moniker is going to lose.
I am moving 65 domains away..
Disgusting. Why it takes this long to respond I do not know!

[mjnels]

Yes folks, Nigerian Monte is live and well...

dude, you're an idiot.

[jrzeygirl]

Everyone

My apologies for the delayed reply - as I am out of town/on vacation. Yesterday when I was informed of this post, I immediately reported it and it IS being investigated. Once we have clarification on the situation and find out exactly what happened someone will be back online to post/clear it up.

Thanks for your patience.

[Poohnix]

Everyone

My apologies for the delayed reply - as I am out of town/on vacation. Yesterday when I was informed of this post, I immediately reported it and it IS being investigated. Once we have clarification on the situation and find out exactly what happened someone will be back online to post/clear it up.

Thanks for your patience.

Thanks.
I've never questioned that it's actually being investigated, as anyone can see who really read my posts. What I question is how it could happen in the first place, how the payment at all could be reversed after being "secured", why, if they themselves didn't consider the payment "secured", were so quick in transferring the domain, why the domain obviously wasn't locked down, in spite of claims of the opposite, and why I have to point out several times that the domain IS transferred to another registrar before anyone actually believes me. (if anybody has yet done that... I haven't received any update since then...) Also, even if investigated, if I don't get the domain back pretty soon, (and then I mean a couple of days, max), I will require Moniker to reimburse me for the loss, and they can no longer claim to have never lost a domain. Even if the domain eventually is recovered, this whole story shows that Moniker is not at all that safe as they try to claim, and that there really are serious flaws in their security and in their corporate security culture.
I also question the responsiveness of the support, the functionality of their support ticket system, (never experienced anything worse, and I have a lot of experince, from both sides), and why an operation such as Moniker/Snapnames/Oversee.net doesn't have 24/7/365 support. They really should be able to afford it.
One reason that last part of it upsets me so much, is because I know how easy it is to provide good support, if you really want to. I myself own a business with currently some 15,000 customers, where I from the beginning put the quality policy that any support ticket, or customer update to support ticket, should have a response within 60 minutes, 24/7/365. To archive that goal we abandoned email support and implemented a ticket system already 8 years ago, and that has worked flawlessly since. (Our average response time is 26 minutes. And this is for customers who each pay a lot less than anyone pays Moniker - in some cases as little as a one-time fee or $2, gross. A few cents, net.)


....
I just received an email from Don Lyons, my account rep at Moniker.
Initially I thought it was a reply to this issue (I just saw a quick popup from Outlook about mail from Don Lyons, but didn't see the subject), but the email was an advertisement pushing how secure Moniker was - transfer your domains to Moniker, disguised as a Hijack alert about this:
http://www.dnforum.com/f521/hijackin...ad-376815.html

I start to I wonder how long time they are going to act three little monkeys until they realize the truth about their own security...

[TheLegendaryJP]

I agree Moniker should have secured payment prior to releasing the name. The fact it was reversed shows it was not a cash payment per say.

Monte has always been fairly quick to reply when contacted and I suggest you contact him f things do not progress. He is very willing to communicate concerning all matters from what I have experienced and seen.

Also I would press for more information in regards to the theifs account, name, location etc. If the name is now moved than Moniker has no control therefore you must get this info and either contact the new registrar and link this thread.

Try these avenues first and quick move to a lawyer, don;t want to have to but ultimately its the only choice.

I found speaking with the right people at registrars and laying out the story with proof goes a long way most times. It isnt as hopeless as it sounds.

All the best

[Poohnix]

Also I would press for more information in regards to the theifs account, name, location etc. If the name is now moved than Moniker has no control therefore you must get this info and either contact the new registrar and link this thread.

I failed to note the info on the buyer when that was seen in my Moniker account, at least his email was, but it was when I was going to check that and note it down yesterday that I noticed the domain had been removed from my account again.
I know the Snapnames account name was: "terrynew"

The domain appears to now be with a Directi reseller, iboar.com (BOARDN CO.,LTD)
Does anyone know anything about them? The domain iboar.com appears to have dropped earlier this year....

Actually, that was a couple of days ago... now it appears to be directly with Directi, unless I'm reading the records wrong.

[Theo]

Have you filed a police report yet? If not, do it asap.

[TheLegendaryJP]

I bet Monte or Jersey Girl will happily resend you the buyers info.

[Poohnix]

Monte is on Vacation... "with limited access to email".
So is Bari, in spite of her responding here earlier.

[Theo]

You need to file a police report to set forth the process of recovery and potentially talk to an attorney about it.

[Poohnix]

You need to file a police report to set forth the process of recovery and potentially talk to an attorney about it.

You're probably right.
Me being in Europe doesn't help though... I'll see what I can do in that regard. (Looking at FBI:s web site. Looks like it should be possible...)

[Theo]

Let me put it this way. If you were to attempt to retrieve the domains via WIPO, having had a police report filed would greatly assist in determining ownership. Not to mention, that Moniker is obligated to retrieve these domains for you in conjunction with the gaining registrar, *especially* since they acted as the escrow! You only need to file a local report, e.g. in Sweden.

[Poohnix]

Let me put it this way. If you were to attempt to retrieve the domains via WIPO, having had a police report filed would greatly assist in determining ownership. Not to mention, that Moniker is obligated to retrieve these domains for you in conjunction with the gaining registrar, *especially* since they acted as the escrow! You only need to file a local report, e.g. in Sweden.

Planning on doing both...

[Oversee Support]

I want to address some of the issues and concerns that have been raised by this incident, and I will to the extent permitted by our privacy policy – as you can understand, we will not discuss details of a client's account in a public forum. It's just not possible to fully address a private party's situation in this medium. I appreciate your understanding.

I realize this post may be less than fully satisfying to some. For me, it's challenging to see assumptions and speculation made without full knowledge of the situation. It’s important that we speak to the facts as much as possible. That said, we understand the concern that other customers don't want something like this to happen to them. But be assured there are processes in place, and the domains are not and will not be lost.

This unfortunately involved a fraud attempt. We of course are taking care of our client, and the fraud issue is being addressed by all appropriate avenues and we’re pursuing all possible remedies. Now, let's get to the specific concerns that were expressed.

As the Director of Inside Sales & Support, I apologize for the delay in responses. Not knowing what's happening is often more frustrating than just knowing and dealing with something. When we're executing an investigation, we'll often be very reserved about what's happening until we have the facts. For example, we don't know if there is collusion between buyer and seller – in this case, clearly there was not. We should have made that determination sooner and advised the client of our work in more detail.

In addition to response times, there was a miscommunication about the status of the domains. This was due to a syncing error between the two platforms. We're in the process of completing the integration of the platforms and don't expect to have this type of error in the future. This miscommunication added to the client's frustration and we apologize for that.

When it comes to the subject of fulfilling domains after an auction, that too has been a matter of policy. Like every company, we've had to choose between convenience for the majority of your clients who are honest and forthright, and protection against the minority of clients who are dishonest. We've traditionally erred on the side of convenience for our clients. Clearly, in this case, that was abused by a disreputable party. Given our commitment to our customers, we are reviewing this policy and process.

The last portion is the one that everyone is, undoubtedly, awaiting the outcome. There are several factors that contributed to this situation that, for security reasons, we cannot and will not discuss or disclose. (And I recognize that that response is less than satisfying or helpful but in a world where some are fully committed to fraudulent activity, it's a reality.) We're also in the middle of an active investigation which further restricts what I can discuss. What I can say is that the movement of the domain has been restricted per our procedures. I'm confident I can report successful resolution of this very soon.

Everyone knows Moniker and SnapNames' commitment to our customers and doing the right thing on their behalf. We take this situation extremely seriously and will get it resolved. We will also do whatever is necessary to prevent anyone from questioning our ability to protect our client assets. There is nothing more important to us.

Rob McClinton
Director of Inside Sales & Support
Oversee.net
The home of DomainSponsor, Moniker & SnapNames

[GUA]

If I was gorlov I would be even more annoyed.

Not only have Moniker/Snapnames lost his name... they are now coming up with lackluster, badly worded/explained excuses which amount to nothing.

What you really mean is Moniker really is not THAT secure.. I.E You have been lieing to your customers all this time.

Furthermore youve done very well to avoid answering everyone's questions: Why is Monikers support system so crap? Do your account executives actually exist? Why do your staff not understand whois? etc etc etc