Follow-up to Delimiter's fraud accusations

geekalot

@MarkTurner said:
ihatetonyy vRozenSch00n - I was going to just stay out of this because we're still going round in circles as as you put it the 'armchair lawyers' want to contribute now. But.....

geekalot etc - Yomura OWNS Delimiter. When you use a Delimiter service, you are in fact using a Yomura service. Delimiter is a sales and support operation nothing more, all of their infrastructure, servers, IPs are owned and operated by Yomura. Everytime Delimiter's techs can't solve a ticket they escalate it to Yomura to resolve. Everytime there is a DDOS, Yomura's NetOps deal with the attack and notify the relevant brand (eg Delimiter) to notify their customer.

Lets really analyse this situation, a customer buys a service from Delimiter, who deploys the service in a Yomura datacentre, on Yomura Network. When a customer asks for assistance a Delimiter employee takes care of it (not an outsourced service, more on that in a moment), who if they need assistance requests it from their parent company who is also their service provider.

In this instance Yomura acts as Delimiter's agent to provide the service and as its agent to provide any additional technical assistance.

...

@MarkTurner, nice explanation ... probably more of an explanation than I have seen you give anywhere regarding Delimiter & Yomura.

I have worked for a Fortune 100 company (that has numerous subsidiaries), specifically on Information Security & Data Protection (including PCI Audit, etc).

And, I am telling you that you can brought to task for "data sharing" between "separate legal entities" whether out of the goodness of your heart or otherwise. There is a reason they are separate ... blur those lines and it can open a can of worms (particularly in the US).

I am not arguing Delimiter's (or is it Yomura's?) right to enforce their ToS. But admittedly, whether by audit or otherwise, this was an interesting way to handle this specific case (including the delayed FraudRecord reporting regarding the former customer).

It is also interesting that you characterize Yomura as Delimiter's agent, when some might argue that Delimiter is Yomura's agent.

That is it from me for today. Cheers for now.

vRozenSch00n

@geekalot Nice conversation, btw.

Cheers.

Maounique

geekalot said: blur those lines and it can open a can of worms (particularly in the US).

This is so true and obvious people are making many mistakes in those fields.
For example, if the tax authority finds out you are operating servers of a company you fully own to host customers of another company you also fully own, either directly through shares or indirectly through a "vehicle" of sorts and you do not have the papers in order (such as renting papers, contracts, payments between the companies direactly and NOT through your pocket then you can face a lot of penalties for tax evasion, money laundering, even fraud, this is a very serious issue, so, what Yomura does with people working for and offering hardware to Delimiter, if not backed up by the proper paperwork and taxes paid in full can be considered illegal.

geekalot

@vRozenSch00n said:
geekalot Nice conversation, btw.

Cheers.

Thanks @vRozenSch00n. I think the majority of us enjoy good, civil discourse when there are differing opinions.

I (hope) by now everyone realizes this is not personal OR some vendetta against Yomura/Delimiter (I have never done business with them to have reason for that) OR a desire for "internet combat."

I agree that this is a very interesting conversation (that unfortunately has strayed away from the OP's original concern).

And, I truly hope that the FraudRecord person who is a member of this forum listens to what may be concerns for a number of people on how that system could be improved to better serve all parties involved.

This was definitely not the OP's finest hour/best decision .... and it wasn't Yomura/Delimiter's either.

Cheers

8420PR

Does a fraudrecord report really matter?

Such a big long discussion (and lots of emotion from the OP) about this fraudrecord report (which IMO seems entirely factual), but does it actually matter? Surely it is as simple as using a different email address and any future order would not be identified by fraudrecord?

Maounique

8420PR said: Surely it is as simple as using a different email address and any future order would not be identified by fraudrecord?

If you used entirely fake data, no, it does not matter, this is my point too, such cases when the host jumps the gun because they are annoyed or to punish someone, even though no fraud was committed and they already offered service for a while will make people more reluctant to provide even a bit of personal data.
However, since the customer did provide some personal data, it will matter.
From our dealings with Italian police and judges if there is enough data to identify the perpetrator, they will be OK with it, after all, they should not be after hosts, i.e. make sure they fail due to "anti-terror" legislation, but after the perpetrator. In some countries, though, such as those involved in crusades and where religion is heavily involved in politics, you tend to see everyone associated with some criminal as being actually providing at least safe harbour to them is not actually contributing, under the principle "who does not persecute muslims and their religion of terror is a terrorist".

Dean

So what's the outcome of this thread? I lost track ages ago now.

Do we need a fraudrecord/arbitrator for hosts? Or is it LET?

I'm surprised there is no mechanism for disputing entries... Which then goes to an independent arbitrator.

Lee

I would be interested to see how the so called encrypted fraud record could possibly arbitrate this correctly without personal information being provided which in itself would add to the already flawed system

ricardo

DeanClinton said: arbitrator

So many eye rolls on these threads but I think that's really what a forum like LET is for, just lay it out on the table and let people draw their own conclusions.

IMO FR will at some point get a record of a customer with deep pockets and an axe to grind, but in the meantime it's at least nice to see the ongoing situation.