Microsoft "SiteFinder" Quietly Raking It In

An anonymous reader writes in with the news, which isn't particularly new, that Microsoft's Internet Explorer sends typo domain names to a page of pay-per-click ads. In this endeavor Microsoft joins Charter and Earthlink in profiting from the dubious practice that Verisign pioneered but failed to make stick. The article is on a site whose audience is, among others, those who attempt to profit by typo-squatting, and its tone is just a bit petulant because individuals cannot hope to profit in this game on the scale Microsoft effortlessly achieves.

Even if it is from Microsoft...

It's weird, but I don't mind Sitefinder. It's a lot less annoying than the people who set up sites that spawn eight and a half billion popup ads. I suppose Microsoft really can be the lesser of two evils... ... oh, God. I didn't actually say that, did I?

Re:Even if it is from Microsoft...

Sitefinder is EVIL. While this is just fine.

Sitefinder was implemented with a wildcard DNS record. This means that any typo gets resolved anyway. So suppose there's a mail server running on that machine for some reason. Now all the mail you send to the wrong domain name gets sent to that server instead of failing directly.

In this case, two things may happen, both of them very undesirable:

If it bounces, then that will confuse many people as they won't realize they made a typo and think they got the account name wrong, or that the person cancelled their account. It also results in your probably private mail getting sent to some random server for absolutely no good reason.

The more evil possibility is that the server will accept your mail, which would be the exact same thing they do for websites. Then maybe it will reply with an ad, or perhaps just keep it. Anything can happen in this case really.

This is the problem with sitefinder: DNS isn't just for websites, and it would break quite a lot of things.

On the other hand, IE sending the user to some page with ads is perfectly fine. It's IE specific, it doesn't interfer with your mail or anything else, and it's probably a configuration option you can disable. And you certainly won't get it if you don't use MS software.

MX-records are optional - SiteFinder really evil

Mmm, I think Sitefinder only resolved/resolves A records, not MX records. Your mail would STILL bounce with NXDOMAIN, providing I'm right.

In the absence of an MX record e-mail gets delivered to the A record — MX records [wikipedia.org] are optional. If none is found, the request is made for the A-record, and that gets used instead.

Re:Even if it is from Microsoft...

... oh, God. I didn't actually say that, did I?

You did. And if you had prefaced it with "you can mod me down for this, but ..." your post would probably already be +5 Insightful. :)

obligatory

Microsoft's Internet Explorer sends typo domain names to a page of pay-per-click ads

Typ0wned!

Re:obligatory - Don't you mean...

Typ0wned!

Don't you mean: TyPwned

Oops !!

It took me long to come here and post this since I was searching for slahsdot.org on IE..

Re:Oops !!

The last time /. released browser stats, which was, IIRC, before the rise of Firefox, it actually ended up showing something like 70%+ of users were IE, to which there were a lot of hasty "oh, uh, well, I guess it's people having to use IE at work, or something..."

And Google

Rakes in millions (billions?) from shady parked domain farms that run AdWords.

Pioneered

Did Verisign pioneer it? I seem to recall that Microsoft's "feature" came before Verisign tried to do it universally.

Firefox?

I wonder if this might be something the Firefox side of the house could use. Rake in additional cash for the Mozilla foundation and help users. Given the relationship they already seem to have with Google, I doubt this would prove too much of a problem.

Of course, an option should be available for users who do not wish to use the service.

Re:Firefox?

No, Firefox is not doing this! When you type in a domain name that doesn't exist, you get the following:

Server not found

Firefox can't find the server at www.feiwona.org.

• Check the address for typing errors such as ww.example.com instead of www.example.com
• If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer's network connection.
• If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.

(Note: "domain name" means something in the form foo.TLD, not just a word. Words get interpreted as search terms, which do get sent to Google.)

This isn't even in the same league as SiteFinder.

SiteFinder broke DNS for the purpose of making money. This is just a 'feature' similar to the one in Firefox that automatically performs a google search on things you enter into the URL bar if they aren't valid addresses; MS is just taking the idea further (and making money off it, because they love money). I can see people being miffed by the fact that there are ads on the search page, but it's not as if Google doesn't have ads on their search pages.

This is basically just a bunch of advertisers and domain squatters getting upset because Microsoft and Google are making money and they aren't.

Re:This isn't even in the same league as SiteFinde

Firefox makes money off of it too. Google pays Fire Fox a lot of money for those searches.

Re:This isn't even in the same league as SiteFinde

This is just a 'feature' similar to the one in Firefox that automatically performs a google search on things you enter into the URL bar if they aren't valid addresses

That's not true. If it actually looks like an address to Firefox (i.e. it has a period in it and no spaces), then you get a "Server not found" page with the "Try Again" button. The important thing (to me, at least) is that Firefox leaves the url alone when this happens, so you can just correct your mistake and hit enter. IE makes you delete the long address they put in there and start over.

Re:This isn't even in the same league as SiteFinde

Could you be any more misinformed. MSIE drops any nonexistent addresses (assuming you didn't configure it not to) into your default search engine. That can be Live, Google, Yahoo, Altavista, Ask.com, Baidu, even Dogpile if you're crazy. If you prefix it with "http://", then IE will NOT search for you, it will bail with "Cannot find server". There is no money for Microsoft if you a) set a different search engine as your default, b) disable searching from the address bar in Internet Options or c) enter in an address that CLEARLY is a domain name (i.e. has a protocol prefix) but is not correct

Oh, and the consumer likely appreciates Microsoft's approach more. Stop spreading idiocy.

This isn't SiteFinder. This isn't news.

From TFA:
Fire up Internet Explorer and try this right now. Enter Lexus-Financail.com into your address bar and hit enter. (If you're on a different browser, click here to see the results you would get.)

I type "Lexus-Financail.com" into my address bar and IE automatically routes it to a Google search that suggests Lexus-Financial.com. Whenever IE doesn't find a server that you type in the address bar, it redirects to a search using your default search hooks. Mine are set to Google and it uses Google to search. If IE just showed a blank "Server not found" page it wouldn't be broken, but it could easily be argued that using your default search provider to try and find your intended server (in event of a "not found") is useful behavior.

At the end of the day, this isn't "evil" behavior. They aren't preventing people from accessing a legitimate site, they are providing relevant search results instead of a generic error screen. They may garner some ad revenue in the process but they haven't programmed the browser in a way that they are the only ones who could benefit from the behavior. And unless the user is paying their ISP per-bit at an extremely expensive rate, there's no monetary damage to the user.

Only if your default search engine is Live

That happens only if your default search engine is Live.com.

Going to http://www.lexus-financail.com/ [lexus-financail.com] site in IE 7 with no default search engine yields

Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage

Most likely causes:
You are not connected to the Internet.
The website is encountering problems.
There might be a typing error in the address.

So if you want to make untold millions as well, build (a) search engine and (b) popular web browser, and make (a) the default in (b).

Non-Issue

Going to Lexus-Financail.com takes me to Google. Wonder why? Oh, of course, Google is my default search page... Wonder how that happened?

Really, I think this is a "non-issue". You're not locked in to Live.com or any other search site. Microsoft "makes" Internet Explorer, why wouldn't they set the default to Live.com? Why shouldn't they? You can always change it...

At least...

Well if you're gonna do the wrong thing, you at least might as well do it the right way.

Verisign literally broke DNS in their attempt. This cash grab is confined to software that can easily be switched from.

This article is total BS

All IE7 does is go to the search page OF YOUR CHOICE if you misspell something. I have IE7 configured with Google as my default search engine, and when I type in lexus-financail.com I go to Google's search page, which I find is a very helpful feature.

Sheesh, it's like people don't even TRY with the FUD anymore.

My test with IE 7.0

Have google set as my default search engine and it took me to http://www.google.com/search?q=lexus-financail.com [google.com]. Thats without the http:/// [http] part, as per the article. If I put the http:/// [http] part, it gives me a 'Cannot find server or DNS Error' error page.

Article is misleading - it's not just MSN/Live sea

I tried what the article said to do. I have Google set as my default IE search engine. It just did a Google search for the incorrect domain. This seems like a feature (albeit one that I dislike) rather than some money grabbing scam.

Come on, if we want to bash MS, and especially IE, we can do much better than this.

This is inaccurate.

The Sitefinder you mention is nothing of the sort. What you are experiencing is IE7's auto-search feature. If you set your default search to Google, you'll get google search results with the same thing as IE.

Here [defhoboz.biz] is the first page from the blog, with me typing in the same search as the blog does.
Now here [defhoboz.biz] is what I get after I hit enter.

Every ISP not already doing this

is actively testing it. From their perspective, it's free money.

Sheesh

This article is stupid. It's just takes you to the default search engine (which is usually Microsoft), and offers you a spelling correction, which then performs the search. THEN it shows you the search results, which has -- ADS. OH MY GOD!!

In other news, typing the same string into Google (or any other search engine) also shows search results -- WITH ADS.

Man, I've really busted the conspiracy WIDE ASS OPEN.

I don't see it

When I type in their mis-spelled domain name into IE6's address bar, I don't get the advertising page they say I should. All I get is the page from IE saying the hostname couldn't be resolved.

I think the article is conflating two things: manipulation of the DNS network to return actual A records for domains that don't exist vs. IE redirecting any request that yields a DNS error to a pre-configured page. The first breaks all uses of names, the second only breaks IE. The first is a fatal problem because it affects software that doesn't have a human being to interpret the data, may not be able to handle contact with arbitrary hosts and may easily depend on getting accurate "record does not exist" answers from DNS. The second is merely a major annoyance because there's usually a human being sitting there to see the page, get annoyed and fix the configuration so that doesn't happen again.

FireFox and Google...

FireFox has its default page set to Google. Wonder how much that rakes in for Google (and Mozilla)? Come on folks, good for the goose and all...

Dont "search from the address bar"

Searching from the address bar is an option in IE7, as it was in IE6 and others before. If you dont like this behavior (regardless of your search engine), just turn it off!

The user still has a little bit of control with this part, unlike Verisigns' overdone version. (for once. Nice of them, innit)

OpenDNS is the Solution

I highly recommend OpenDNS, available for free at http://www.opendns.com./ [www.opendns.com] They also redirect your typos to a search page, but you can brand the pages with your own logos. They provide many other useful services such as phishing site blocking and DNS usage statistics. You don't even need an account to use their DNS servers, if you don't want the statistics and custom settings.

I have 7 /24 networks registered with them now, and I can't thank them enough. I have zero DNS problems now, and it even seems much faster.

Why don't Open Source browsers do that?

If the browser developers don't need the money, there are enough good causes to contribute to. Being a browser-only thing (unlike SiteFinder, which messed up DNS for all programs, including e-mail), this is not evil — so just do it!..

Absolute fud - Google does the same...

Try typing Lexus-Financial.com into Google...

Apart from getting the two results that link back to this specific story, at the bottom, on big letters, you get Did you mean to search for: Lexus-Financial.com

This is just straight MS bashing for no reason - chances are that if you typo'd, you'd probably be looking for the suggested alternate. If you typed the same stuff into Google and spelt it correctly, chances are your first link would be a sponsored one at the top.

I mean, if a search engine helps you fidn what your looking for, it's doing its job. if it makes money while it's doing it, so what?

This is stupid, but...

...not nearly as bad as what Verisign did. The reason Sitefinder was dangerous is because it has the potential to break things. If an internet-based program relies on a valid server not found error it will break if it gets a ad page redirect. Granted, that would be unusual, but that's not the point. It's been that way since day one. If it's not broken...

It gets worse...

I'm a Charter customer/victim, and the first thing I did upon discovering the new "feature" was disable it. Of course, it's not that easy. Disabling Charter's site-finder bullshit just replaces it with Microsoft's site-finder bullshit, because that's Internet Explorer's default, and apparently they thought that nobody would notice. I notice because I'm using Safari on a Mac, and Windows Live search sure as hell isn't the default behavior for me. "Disable" is supposed to mean "stop doing that", not "do it differently and pretend you've stopped."

The way I see it, if they want to intercept any of my failed DNS queries, they can have them. All of them:

sudo ping -f charter.please.stop.breaking.the.internet.you.cock tards

Stolen tech!

They stole this feature from Firefox! How dare they!

Seriously, since when is defaulting to a -chosen- search engine being monopolistic? I mean, technically, AOL sent you to AOL's search page whether you liked it or not.

There are plenty more things to be critical of MS then this, don't waste perfectly good flame time on silly things.

Why is this on the front page?

News for nerds, stuff that matters?

IE and other browsers have had a "search from the address bar" feature for a long time. And it's user-configurable.

So this isn't news and it doesn't matter.

non-story

They are using the 404 response correctly, this is what it was designed for! IE is trying to do something intellligent when it knows that the page is missing. What verisign did was fool every program (including IE) into thinking *all* pages exist, which breaks anything that wants to respond in a useful way to the page being mistyped.

I checked on a Windows machine, and they even let you change it! Didn't even bury it too deep in the configuration! You can go to google or bash-microsoft.net and thus the mistyped domains probably can hurt them!

Microsoft does plenty of evil and stupid things, but this is not amoung them.

So... learn to type...

...accurately.

End of problem.

Annoying comparisons with Google and Firefox

There are many comparisons here by Microsoft apologists to .. firefox defaulting to a google search which yeilds some PPV ads, and then yelling 'See - Those OSS guys are just as bad, Whats the Difference ?'

Well - the difference is : This is a Microsoft OS that bundles in a Microsoft client browser redirecting a user's request to a Microsoft hosted site which includes PPV ads which end up paying money back to Microsoft.

Cant you see the difference here ?

This is one of the dangers of allowing ONE company to control the whole stack.

If someone clicks through a Google advert, then sure, Google makes money just like MS makes money from its adverts.

The question is not 'Does someone recieve a benefit when a PPV ad is clicked on' .. the question is, as a user .. are the tools that I am using doing _something_ on the internet that ends up benefitting the provider of those tools.

And it is not like Google is in control of either the browser or OS that generates those incoming clicks, and so Google cannot be accused of manipulating the session.

Its the (very subtle) difference between driving a car and accidentally running someone over VS driving a car and accidentally running over your insured spouse. Either way you look at it, its just an accident ... right ? .. and lets just ignore the fact that the driver in the second case also happens to have a record of accidentally benefitting from the deaths of so many other ex-spouses, but lets not allow facts to cloud our judgements here please.

If on the other hand, you totally believe everything MS says, and totally trust everything they do, then good luck to you ...

The author didn't consider unknown host name theft

I noticed the author of the linked-to article did not extend his logic to bad host names within a registered domain. I presume MS's LiveSearch intercepts those as well; so doesn't his original logic, which he talked himself out of, apply (trademark theft)?

Verisign's Sitefinder didn't intercept bad host names within registered domains; only unknown TLD's in .COM and .NET.

Charter's DNS hack always returns an A record regardless of upstream MXDOMAIN failures.

Just two words...

Open DNS -- well, one word and one acronym. Maybe just a URL. http://www.opendns.com/ [opendns.com]

Change default search engine

It's really not as bad as described. If you do mistype a domain name in Internet Explorer all it does is a search for it in the _default_ search engine. This of course happens to be Live search, but the default can easily be changed. Thus, since my default search engine in IE is Google (surprise!), mistyping a domain name takes me too Google search, which by the way also contains PPC ads.

Earthlink?

I'm an earthlink customer and when I mistype something it sends me to an eartlink page that suggests one or two site URL's one of which is almost always the right one. The page itself has no ads on it.

Like the RIAA..

.. those shady domain-squatters are now finding their flawed business model of profiteering from other's work has been broken by the advent of new technology.

Should we expect another flood of lawsuits to browser users..........?

Re:fucking rediculas..

You have no idea what you're talking about. Verisign has NO control beyond administrative. ICANN controls everything, and mandates what the ccTLD registries can do. Verisign only does what ICANN allows. And stop bitching about your USD$9.99 a year. In NZ, our domains are NZD$30 a year (with NZD$2.75 per month going to our central registry, and the infinitesmal profit for the actual registrar)

Re:fucking rediculas..

look at the absurd pricing of the domains.. yes 9.99 a year is EXPENSIVE

What?

I'm a grad student. If I had gone out into industry I'd be making probably six times what I am while I'm in school. I'm cheap: I don't have a car, I have an apartment rather than a house, I'm using a mostly 4 1/2 year-old computer. The one thing I splurge on is living alone. And I don't think that $9.99/yr is expensive.

Discover Magazine is $25/year.
The cheaper of the two local papers has a special on delivery of $40/20 weeks ($104/year at the intro rate -- $214 normally)
I pay about $10/month for phone; most people seem to pay at least 3x that if they have a cell

My hot water comes to about $10/month, my electricity and gas to $50/mth, my heat the last two bills to $90/month (and the newest bill will probably be rather more once I get it), and my rent to $625/month.

Most people have car payments plus insurance of (I think) over $100/mth.

$9.99/year is 83 cents/month. At federal minimum wage, that's 6 minutes 20 seconds per month.

If you think that's expensive, then you don't need a domain.

Re:hahaha

Whatever you've been smoking, stop. You don't have enough brain cells left to kill.