Below are links to related postings on Slashdot and Digg:

Slashdot: MySpace and GoDaddy Shut Down Security Site

Digg: GoDaddy makes security site disappear after MySpace complains

Go Daddy’s TOS “reserves the right to terminate your access to the services at any time, without notice, for any reason whatsoever.”

GoDaddy sucks. What good is a cheap domain if they can cancel it at any time for no reason.

Who owns a domain name? As long as WIPO is the standard arbiter of domain name disputes, registrars should have no say as to whether or not a particular user owns a domain name or not….

I do find the story particularly distasteful on the part of GoDaddy, an organisation I’ve always found to feel “cheep, but not cheerful”.

This was a pointless move on the part of MySpace. The security site in question made available a list of compromised MySpace accounts. This list, however, has been available in the wild for quite a while. There are many other places to get a copy of it, if you are that way inclined.

Ignoring that, there was no reason whatsoever to close the site completely. A simple request to the site’s admin from GoDaddy, on behalf of MySpace, would have undoubtedly resulted in the removal of the offending material.

This was a pointless move on the part of MySpace. The security site in question made available a list of compromised MySpace accounts. This list, however, has been available in the wild for quite a while. There are many other places to get a copy of it, if you are that way inclined.

Ignoring that, there was no reason whatsoever to close the site completely. A simple request to the site’s admin from GoDaddy, on behalf of MySpace, would have undoubtedly resulted in the removal of the offending material.

The same happened to my community forums recently. A user had posted a link to a copyright ebook, and the copyright owner contacted godaddy (instead of me).

Next thing, my domain was pulled and I recieved an email warning me that “this domain name contains material being displayed without the consent of the owner/copyright holder”.

Whats more rediculous about this is, in the case of seclists.org they were actually hosting the material in question. In my case, it was nothing more than a url to another website, posted by a member.

I don’t think this is so cut-and-dried. Yes, it’s scary that they’d cut off a site with little-or-no warning to the site administrator, but at the same time, they did feel that they were protecting the privacy of a large community of internet users. What would have been an appropriate amount of time? An hour? That’s an eternity in internet time, especially when personal login information is involved. (Although MySpace accounts aren’t going to wreak major financial havoc.) And why has no one asked why this guy posted the info in the first place?

If you had read the comments before yours, it would be.