31
October

Security: Log off a user via linux

Via skype chat today we had a client ask us a question:

How can I log out a user who is in shell?

An administrator and/or a root user can log out any user forcefully in linux.  this is done with the use of the pkill command.

pkill command syntax

pkill -KILL -u {username}

To see list of logged in user type who or w command:
# who
OR
# w

To logout user called typo3, enter:
# pkill -KILL -u typo3
OR
$ sudo pkill -KILL -u typo3

20
October

Cogent Latecy this morning

While doing some datacenter migrations between Philadelphia and our Ohio DC’s we noticed a large amount of latency between the two centers – a quick drop of Cogento seems to have fixed the problem.

Boy – am I Happy to have the ability to drop providers at will and be able to fix these kinds of issues on the fly :-)

According to Internet Pulse – Cogent is still having issue:

Picture 1

19
October

Truth in Broadband … hmm a novel idea for the Schumer BoxWhatW

Ok – so here is some trivia -

Who was the United States Senator who championed the Truth-in-Lending legislation that requires credit card companies to carefully format their services to consumers as so: long term interest rates in at least 18 point type, and other important stuff in 12 point type?

Charles Schumer (D-NY),

Inside the box, the company must disclose seven categories of information: any annual fee, the annual percentage rate for purchases, rates for cash advances and other services, grace periods, the card’s system of calculating interest, and other monetary charges including late fees etc…

Broadband Schumer Box

Click image to make larger

What if Broadband Providers needed to do the same thing?

Imagine if the provider was forced to tell you what, if any protocols are blocked, if bandwidth limiting is being done for specific services, the cost for cancellations, service downgrades, moves, modem rental etc etc etc…

What if Wireless Providers were required to provide the same thing?

If and only if — but with the help of the FCC – that day may be here sooner than you think.

Take action and call your local congress representative – tell them to enact the Schumer Box for Broadband and Cellular providers.

19
October

WiFi Security

Recently we attended the cPanel conference in Hoston TX.  The event, like usual, was put on by a professional staff – and there is much we learned.   It is important to note however security did not seem to be a concern when it came to the networking side of things at the event.

The first day, as tweeted, the cPanel event lacked WiFi for the better 1/2 of the morning due to issues with the Hotel itself.  This rose to a number of rouge access points being setup, of which multiple persons logged into.   These access points were giving the SSID such as “Official cPanel Wifi”, “cPanel Wireless” and many more various flavors using the cPanel name.

We logged into one such interface and turned on my systems security just to see what would happen and sure enough – someone came knocking and trying to gain access to our file system.   The real fun part here is that virtually all of these fake access points were “point-to-point” connections and folks were hooking into someone’s laptop.

Next Year for 2010 – cPanel should think about setting up a captive Portal – one for which upon registration at the conference one is given their own user/pass to gain access to the network.   A simple x86 system running PFSense would do this in a heartbeat.   Through that system it would be wise to turn off netbios and other system-to-system traffic as well as redirect all port 2086 traffic to port 2087.    Sadly – many users at the event are green behind the ears when it comes to security and systems administration…

While it is important to note – cPanel did nothing wrong here – it is also important to note that cPanel in the future would be wise to setup the infrastructure to assist in protecting their more greener clients from the bad boys in the room.

Just on our Mac alone – we saw a ton of cPanel employee computers sitting in the connection bin via Bonjour , as was Softlayers, the Planet, Microsoft’s  and HostDimes.  Blocking these types of services would be a great start in ensuring the security of the cPanel users both seasoned and the newbies on the block.

As for our Macs – We run through ssh and proxy always :-)

18
October

syslog-ng : Log Server made Easy

Syslog has been around for some time – however it can be painful if you have logs on every machine – and need to keep bouncing around to find logs w/ similar threads across machines.   – even worse if a machine crashes and you want to review what was going on prior to the crash…

Install Syslog-NG in debian

apt-get install syslog-ng
Reading package lists… Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information… Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
libevtlog0
The following packages will be REMOVED:
rsyslog
The following NEW packages will be installed:
libevtlog0 syslog-ng
0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 1 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 148kB of archives.
After this operation, 24.6kB disk space will be freed.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? Y
Get:1 http://ftp.us.debian.org lenny/main libevtlog0 0.2.8~1-2 [9358B]
Get:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org lenny/main syslog-ng 2.0.9-4.1 [139kB]
Fetched 148kB in 0s (246kB/s)
(Reading database … 38087 files and directories currently installed.)
Removing rsyslog …
Stopping enhanced syslogd: rsyslogd.
Processing triggers for man-db …
Selecting previously deselected package libevtlog0.
(Reading database … 38069 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking libevtlog0 (from …/libevtlog0_0.2.8~1-2_amd64.deb) …
Selecting previously deselected package syslog-ng.
Unpacking syslog-ng (from …/syslog-ng_2.0.9-4.1_amd64.deb) …
Processing triggers for man-db …
Setting up libevtlog0 (0.2.8~1-2) …
Setting up syslog-ng (2.0.9-4.1) …

Configuration file `/etc/init.d/syslog-ng’
==> File on system created by you or by a script.
==> File also in package provided by package maintainer.
What would you like to do about it ?  Your options are:
Y or I  : install the package maintainer’s version
N or O  : keep your currently-installed version
D     : show the differences between the versions
Z     : background this process to examine the situation
The default action is to keep your current version.
*** syslog-ng (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? n

This will complete the installation process.

16
October

Barracuda Stinks imho

Within the past year an organization I work with purchased a Barracuda Anti-Spam appliance (model 600) from Virtual Graffitti.   When the unit arrived (shipped direct from Barracuda) and was unpacked the unit did not operate as advertised.

Upon inspection – the unit was found to be a “Refurbished” unit.   Interesting as the purchase was for a brand new unit.  While Virtual Graffiti worked to get a replacement unit sent – it took numerous phone calls and emails in order to have the situation fixed.

IMHO Clients have never been satisfied with the unit – while Barracuda has advertised you can use the same unit for scanning incoming and outgoing email – the truth is it should state – you can use the same unit for scanning incoming and just sending outgoing email – as there is no support for scanning in both directions.

Clients have repeatedly complained about missing emails – that phantomly disappear, as well as the system having numerous false positives.

Fast forward a few months – and the “BRAND NEW UNIT” sent fails.

The Barracuda technician was very difficult to understand while on the telephone – and promised a unit would be sent overnight as a replacement.

It is now 48+ hours – and a Friday evening later – and the replacement unit still has not arrived.  Furthermore – after speaking with customer service we are told “sorry – but you need to send us your unit for “free repair” – as you have not ordered the replacement warranty.

This unit has not operated as advertised, There have been numerous calls to support – as well as even having a support representative try to sell the service he provides instead…

If their own techs are not happy – and sell other services why should anyone continue to utilize the appliance.

With a cost of $10K roughly to purchase the unit – and what we have found to be a failure rate of less than 12 months – One should ask – why should anyone purchase the annual updates.

A hosted service from someone like SpamExperts.com, as seen at this years cPanel conference, is sounding better and better.

That Mail Foundry offer sounds good as well…

————— An update —————-

While it sometimes requires someone to turbo things Barracuda has taken their lack of customer dis-service to a whole new level.   While fighting with support online – about replacing a unit that crashed days ago – it seems the blog posting – while landing at # 2 online under google for “barracuda sucks” seems to be the best way to get support.

That being said – we have a new unit that was shipped to us.   Interestingly enough – a few changes on this unit. Starting with the Drives.    The old drives (on the “new purchase”) were marked “re-certified” and were run of the mill Western Digital Sata drives.     The new – Seagate drives.  - perhaps we finally got the actual “brand new unit” 8 months into our purchase.

We hoped this would be the end of the issues – however we are still fighting to get the support needed to get the system back up to snuff:

  1. System will not take the CSR / CRT files to allow for the SSL cert we carry on the unit. – I spoke with a pretty decent support rep who stated he could not get copies of the certs via email and thinks that they were getting blocked by their spam filter.  - amazing – A FALSE POSITIVE (like we have not had enough of those in the past… )
  2. System on boot gives an interesting error:   [mtent] warning:  no final new line at the end of /etc/fstab –   Honestly – this is perhaps one of the easiest things to fix – all support needs to do is login to the unit and do a simple vi to the /etc/fstab file and hit enter at the end… however  the support rep – (EDITED to Initials IL) did not know how to do this – and simply sent a note stating – ignore the error. –  I don’t know about you – but I hate having errors on a device that cost roughly $10K -

In the great sea of Anti-Spam appliances – it is best for the fisherman to perhaps choose to sail a different ship vs. pulling in a big Barracuda – for us swimming in these brackish waters has been an uncomfortable experience.

09
October

cPanelCon09: Enkompass

cPanel takes a hit and makes it a winner…

cPanel enKompass - Better than VaporWare

cPanel enKompass - Better than VaporWare

Many have felt that cPanel’s promise of a Windows solution was nothing more than vaporware… however with their demo earlier this year @ HostingCon – and the various reviews at this years cPanel Con – the Hostmedic Agency feels this will be a large player – if not the dominator in the Shared Hosting platform for Windows.

To date however, the licensing program has yet to be figured out – however cPanel insiders stated that in order for the system to pay off the investment involved with trashing the first version and going for an entire rewrite of the code-base (thus producing a quality product which should make the competition scared) they must charge per domain.

cPanel, has been known as the leader in hosting control panel software and automation solutions for some time in the Linux market – and their enKompass platform for Windows 2008 is no different.   The easy to use interface mirrors the usability factors of their Linux WHM and cPanel solutions – however unlike the current linux solution – it will allow multiple servers.

cPanel however admits, with their first release some usability options such as DNS Clustering with their Linux Bind product does not exist.

Want to Learn more about enKompass?  Visit the cPanel site for additional details.

09
October

cPanelCon 09: Review on Cust Service

conferencecta_sml

Your to Late for 09 Folks!

This week, Glenn Kelley, of the HostMedic group went to the cPanel 2009 event, hosted at the Hilton America, Houston TX.

cPanel did an excellent job this year bringing in additional vendors, however much of the vendor talks – with the exception of R1Soft were very dry and … dare I say boring.

As usual cPanel showed their best face, as if there might be any other.   Perhaps more interesting than the introduction of what many hinted as “vaporware” -the Windows Platform product called Enkompass, was the number of faces that changed and were now wearing the official cPanel employee shirt and badge.

Sean_Richards_photo1

Sean Richards, cPanel.com

While may are expecting reviews – on the different talks, and vendors present – this posting is strictly about cPanel as a company itself.  Sean Richards, cPanel Lead Technical support Manager, described the cPanel philosophy of support as well as their hiring practices.

Mr Richards described how they will often receive various resume’s but rarely if ever hire unless it is someone they recruited directly.    Much of the additions to their tech and sales pool it appeared due to the changing uniforms from vendors and partners last year.   Mario for example – an excellent leader with The Planet and then R1Soft is now with cPanel in charge of leading their Partner Program.

Under his direction – I am sure the Partner Community which hardly exists now – will have a complete overhaul and a bright future.

Mr. Richards decision to speak about the levels of support – and more importantly the entire philosophy solidifies what we have stated about cPanel in the past:   “They are a company focused on not only service but Enhancing their partners ability to provide service.”  Their session focused on the best practices for their partners to keep customers happy by offering effective ways to drive customer satisfaction.

Nick Schmitz, of HavaWeb, asked a few questions that makes us wonder if he might be the next aquisition to their awesome client service team.

Additional reviews are coming soon on the different talks – Let’s hope the cPanelCon2010 gets filmed – as the levels of information shared with the attendees would be great to review time and time again.

01
October

US Dept. of Commerce sets ICANN Free

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has reached a new agreement with the United States Department of Commerce (DOC).  The longtime agreement in which the Dept of Commerce (US) had oversight of ICANN expired  (called the JPA) – and the new agreement called an Affirmation of Commitments, sets up reviews of ICANN’s performance every three years, with the Department of Commerce (DOC), independent experts as well as members of ICANN advisory committees and others serving on review teams.

The new agreement is a “huge moment not just for ICANN but for the Internet,” said Paul Levins, vice president at ICANN. “This really vital resource was being overseen by one government.”

The new affirmation allows the nonprofit greater independence and limits the US DOC to just 1 seat for the three year review.  The new agreement ends the “unilateral” review of ICANN by the DOC and sets up independent review panels which allows the rest of the world to have a say.  Basically the US is giving up sole and full control over ICANN and sharing it with “the world”

Here is the transcript of the comments made by Rod Beckstrom, the CEO of ICANN Today:

“””””ICANN was created to help move the domain name system that holds all the names and all the addresses together on the internet globally. Rod Beckstrom – ICANN Chief Executive Officer

And it was meant to transfer that responsibility from the U.S. government into the private sector, into a multi-stakeholder nonprofit organization. And the JPA was set up to assist that transfer and to make sure that transfer was successful.

With the conclusion of the JPA, it means we’ve hit that target after 11 years and we’re now mature enough to move on to the next phase of our global development. So it’s a real exciting time for us to enter a whole new level as an organization.

How would you characterize the JPA?

Would you characterize it as a success?

Absolutely. There was a set of milestones that were established specifically around engaging different stakeholder communities: the addressing groups around the world, the ISPs, the registrars, the registries, and cultivating those communities and getting them engaged in self-governance for the Internet. That has succeeded.

JPA is gone. We now have this Affirmation.  What is this Affirmation?

The Affirmation is an Affirmation of Commitments among the parties effectively for us to have a continued relationship with the United States government, and our commitment to do periodic reviews of our accountability and transparency as an organization of our performance and security and resiliency and in other areas. And we’re committing to do those reviews, but in the past under the JPA those reviews were simply submitted to the U.S. government. Under the new relationship, these reviews are developed by what will conventionally be an international committee of parties chosen by the chairman of our Governmental Advisory Committee, who represents 100 countries around the world, and the CEO of ICANN–myself– or in some cases the chairman of ICANN.

And so what it means is we’ll do some reviews– we’re committing to do those–and the United States government will have one seat the table at one of those three sets of reviews, and the rest will be as appointed by these parties, including the Governmental Advisory Committee. So what it really means is we’re going global. All the reviews and all the work done will be submitted for public comment to the world. And the United States, just like every other country, will be a recipient of that information through the publication of the results.

But there’s no separate or unique or separate reporting to the United States government. All the reporting is to the world; that’s the real change. Under the JPA the reporting was just to the U.S. government, and some of it was handled publicly, and now all the reporting is global.

A number of senior U.S. congressional leaders in early August sent us a letter expressing some concerns or things that appeared they wanted us to have in any relationship that might replace the JPA, in this case the Affirmation document. And the Affirmation document takes on all three of the issues that they raised, and I think they should be quite satisfied.

The first was that they wanted to see a long-term or a document with more permanence, a more permanent relationship. That is accomplished. The Affirmation is effectively a perpetual agreement. There are some abilities of the parties to exit, but it is fundamentally a long-standing agreement.

Secondly, they were concerned that ICANN remain on U.S. soil for its headquarter offices. We have reaffirmed our commitment to do that in the Affirmation agreement.

And thirdly, they wanted to make sure that we had adequate accountability for our performance as a private nonsector group. And as discussed already, accountability reviews will be part of what we do every three years from here on out, continuing as an organization under the Affirmation document.

If anyone is concerned about the conclusion of the JPA and is concerned about this move to the Affirmation, they should just open their eyes and look at the world. The internet is spreading everywhere. It’s spreading into our PDAs, into our telephones, into our computer classrooms, in huts in Kenya, in the backwoods of Thailand, in the rainforest. The internet is connecting us all, and it’s this amazing fabric that’s bringing us together as mankind. And it is a global phenomenon.

In addition to the Affirmation agreement, we’re moving towards fully supporting different scripts and languages in domain names, and these two efforts will tie together very nicely. But the internet’s becoming more global because today you have to type dot com or a dot extension that has English-like or Latin characters, what we call ASCII. In the near future–next year–we’ll be rolling out Chinese, Russian, and different languages.

So the Affirmation is our commitment to be global and to report to the global community and then, technologically, we’re opening up other pieces of the internet, too. So the primary expansion now is around the world, of course. It’s highly saturated in the United States and other advanced countries, and we’re seeing tremendous uptake now across Asia and into Africa, Latin America, and all over the world.””””

Here is the affirmation document:

AFFIRMATION OF COMMITMENTS BY THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND THE INTERNET CORPORATION FOR
ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS

1. This document constitutes an Affirmation of Commitments (Affirmation) by the United States Department of Commerce (”DOC”) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (”ICANN”), a not-for-profit corporation. In recognition of the conclusion of the Joint Project Agreement and to institutionalize and memorialize the technical coordination of the Internet’s domain name and addressing system (DNS)1, globally by a private sector led organization, the parties agree as follows:

2. The Internet is a transformative technology that will continue to empower people around the globe, spur innovation, facilitate trade and commerce, and enable the free and unfettered flow of information. One of the elements of the Internet’s success is a highly decentralized network that enables and encourages decision-making at a local level. Notwithstanding this decentralization, global technical coordination of the Internet’s underlying infrastructure – the DNS – is required to ensure interoperability.

3. This document affirms key commitments by DOC and ICANN, including commitments to: (a) ensure that decisions made related to the global technical coordination of the DNS are made in the public interest and are accountable and transparent; (b) preserve the security, stability and resiliency of the DNS; (c) promote competition, consumer trust, and consumer choice in the DNS marketplace; and (d) facilitate international participation in DNS technical coordination.

4. DOC affirms its commitment to a multi-stakeholder, private sector led, bottom-up policy development model for DNS technical coordination that acts for the benefit of global Internet users. A private coordinating process, the outcomes of which reflect the public interest, is best able to flexibly meet the changing needs of the Internet and of Internet users. ICANN and DOC recognize that there is a group of participants that engage in ICANN’s processes to a greater extent than Internet users generally. To ensure that its decisions are in the public interest, and not just the interests of a particular set of stakeholders, ICANN commits to perform and publish analyses of the positive and negative effects of its decisions on the public, including any financial impact on the public, and the positive or negative impact (if any) on the systemic security, stability and resiliency of the DNS.

5. DOC recognizes the importance of global Internet users being able to use the Internet in their local languages and character sets, and endorses the rapid introduction of internationalized country code top level domain names (ccTLDs), provided related security, stability and resiliency issues are first addressed. Nothing in this document is an expression of support by DOC of any specific plan or proposal for the implementation of new generic top level domain names (gTLDs) or is an expression by DOC of a view that the potential consumer benefits of new gTLDs outweigh the potential costs.

6. DOC also affirms the United States Government’s commitment to ongoing participation in ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). DOC recognizes the important role of the GAC with respect to ICANN decision-making and execution of tasks and of the effective consideration by ICANN of GAC input on the public policy aspects of the technical coordination of the Internet DNS.

7. ICANN commits to adhere to transparent and accountable budgeting processes, fact-based policy development, cross-community deliberations, and responsive consultation procedures that provide detailed explanations of the basis for decisions, including how comments have influenced the development of policy consideration, and to publish each year an annual report that sets out ICANN’s progress against ICANN’s bylaws, responsibilities, and strategic and operating plans. In addition, ICANN commits to provide a thorough and reasoned explanation of decisions taken, the rationale thereof and the sources of data and information on which ICANN relied.

8. ICANN affirms its commitments to: (a) maintain the capacity and ability to coordinate the Internet DNS at the overall level and to work for the maintenance of a single, interoperable Internet; (b) remain a not for profit corporation, headquartered in the United States of America with offices around the world to meet the needs of a global community; and (c) to operate as a multi-stakeholder, private sector led organization with input from the public, for whose benefit ICANN shall in all events act. ICANN is a private organization and nothing in this Affirmation should be construed as control by any one entity.

9. Recognizing that ICANN will evolve and adapt to fulfill its limited, but important technical mission of coordinating the DNS, ICANN further commits to take the following specific actions together with ongoing commitment reviews specified below:

9.1 Ensuring accountability, transparency and the interests of global Internet users: ICANN commits to maintain and improve robust mechanisms for public input, accountability, and transparency so as to ensure that the outcomes of its decision-making will reflect the public interest and be accountable to all stakeholders by: (a) continually assessing and improving ICANN Board of Directors (Board) governance which shall include an ongoing evaluation of Board performance, the Board selection process, the extent to which Board composition meets ICANN’s present and future needs, and the consideration of an appeal mechanism for Board decisions; (b) assessing the role and effectiveness of the GAC and its interaction with the Board and making recommendations for improvement to ensure effective consideration by ICANN of GAC input on the public policy aspects of the technical coordination of the DNS; (c) continually assessing and improving the processes by which ICANN receives public input (including adequate explanation of decisions taken and the rationale thereof); (d) continually assessing the extent to which ICANN’s decisions are embraced, supported and accepted by the public and the Internet community; and (e) assessing the policy development process to facilitate enhanced cross community deliberations, and effective and timely policy development. ICANN will organize a review of its execution of the above commitments no less frequently than every three years, with the first such review concluding no later than December 31, 2010. The review will be performed by volunteer community members and the review team will be constituted and published for public comment, and will include the following (or their designated nominees): the Chair of the GAC, the Chair of the Board of ICANN, the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the DOC, representatives of the relevant ICANN Advisory Committees and Supporting Organizations and independent experts. Composition of the review team will be agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members) and the Chair of the Board of ICANN. Resulting recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within six months of receipt of the recommendations. Each of the foregoing reviews shall consider the extent to which the assessments and actions undertaken by ICANN have been successful in ensuring that ICANN is acting transparently, is accountable for its decision-making, and acts in the public interest. Integral to the foregoing reviews will be assessments of the extent to which the Board and staff have implemented the recommendations arising out of the other commitment reviews enumerated below.

9.2 Preserving security, stability and resiliency: ICANN has developed a plan to enhance the operational stability, reliability, resiliency, security, and global interoperability of the DNS, which will be regularly updated by ICANN to reflect emerging threats to the DNS. ICANN will organize a review of its execution of the above commitments no less frequently than every three years. The first such review shall commence one year from the effective date of this Affirmation. Particular attention will be paid to: (a) security, stability and resiliency matters, both physical and network, relating to the secure and stable coordination of the Internet DNS; (b) ensuring appropriate contingency planning; and (c) maintaining clear processes. Each of the reviews conducted under this section will assess the extent to which ICANN has successfully implemented the security plan, the effectiveness of the plan to deal with actual and potential challenges and threats, and the extent to which the security plan is sufficiently robust to meet future challenges and threats to the security, stability and resiliency of the Internet DNS, consistent with ICANN’s limited technical mission. The review will be performed by volunteer community members and the review team will be constituted and published for public comment, and will include the following (or their designated nominees): the Chair of the GAC, the CEO of ICANN, representatives of the relevant Advisory Committees and Supporting Organizations, and independent experts. Composition of the review team will be agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members) and the CEO of ICANN. Resulting recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within six months of receipt of the recommendations.

9.3 Promoting competition, consumer trust, and consumer choice: ICANN will ensure that as it contemplates expanding the top-level domain space, the various issues that are involved (including competition, consumer protection, security, stability and resiliency, malicious abuse issues, sovereignty concerns, and rights protection) will be adequately addressed prior to implementation. If and when new gTLDs (whether in ASCII or other language character sets) have been in operation for one year, ICANN will organize a review that will examine the extent to which the introduction or expansion of gTLDs has promoted competition, consumer trust and consumer choice, as well as effectiveness of (a) the application and evaluation process, and (b) safeguards put in place to mitigate issues involved in the introduction or expansion. ICANN will organize a further review of its execution of the above commitments two years after the first review, and then no less frequently than every four years. The reviews will be performed by volunteer community members and the review team will be constituted and published for public comment, and will include the following (or their designated nominees): the Chair of the GAC, the CEO of ICANN, representatives of the relevant Advisory Committees and Supporting Organizations, and independent experts. Composition of the review team will be agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members) and the CEO of ICANN. Resulting recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within six months of receipt of the recommendations.

9.3.1 ICANN additionally commits to enforcing its existing policy relating to WHOIS, subject to applicable laws. Such existing policy requires that ICANN implement measures to maintain timely, unrestricted and public access to accurate and complete WHOIS information, including registrant, technical, billing, and administrative contact information. One year from the effective date of this document and then no less frequently than every three years thereafter, ICANN will organize a review of WHOIS policy and its implementation to assess the extent to which WHOIS policy is effective and its implementation meets the legitimate needs of law enforcement and promotes consumer trust. The review will be performed by volunteer community members and the review team will be constituted and published for public comment, and will include the following (or their designated nominees): the Chair of the GAC, the CEO of ICANN, representatives of the relevant Advisory Committees and Supporting Organizations, as well as experts, and representatives of the global law enforcement community, and global privacy experts. Composition of the review team will be agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members) and the CEO of ICANN. Resulting recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within six months of receipt of the recommendations.

10. To facilitate transparency and openness in ICANN’s deliberations and operations, the terms and output of each of the reviews will be published for public comment. Each review team will consider such public comment and amend the review as it deems appropriate before it issues its final report to the Board.

11. The DOC enters into this Affirmation of Commitments pursuant to its authority under 15 U.S.C. 1512 and 47 U.S.C. 902. ICANN commits to this Affirmation according to its Articles of Incorporation and its Bylaws. This agreement will become effective October 1, 2009. The agreement is intended to be long-standing, but may be amended at any time by mutual consent of the parties. Any party may terminate this Affirmation of Commitments by providing 120 days written notice to the other party. This Affirmation contemplates no transfer of funds between the parties. In the event this Affirmation of Commitments is terminated, each party shall be solely responsible for the payment of any expenses it has incurred. All obligations of the DOC under this Affirmation of Commitments are subject to the availability of funds.

FOR THE NATIONAL
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION:

________________________________

Name: Lawrence E. Strickling
Title: Assistant Secretary for
Communications and Information

Date: September 30, 2009

FOR THE INTERNET CORPORATION
AND FOR ASSIGNED NAMES AND
NUMBERS:

______________________________

Name: Rod Beckstrom
Title: President and CEO

Date: September 30, 2009

30
September

cPanel Email Aliases – copy from server to server

Recently the Hostmedic group was asked by a client to move a fairly large account from one server to another.  The client uses the cPanel interface.   While everything moved quite well – they were left with one issue -  eMail aliases – forwarders did not copy over.

if this happens to you – just scp the domain(s) file under /etc/valiases from the original server to the new.

#  scp -pr /etc/valiases/domain.com root@newserverip:/etc/valiases/

Hope that saves someone a headache or two