[sf-lug] [slightly? OT] gandi.net, whois, GDPR: Re: whois: ...

[Michael Paoli]

I checked, ... the domains I have / take care of under registrar gandi.net
all have their whois "public" - at least as public as seems feasible
there.  Not sure what might happen between gandi.net and what ICANN
does/doesn't show, but if one hits the gandi.net whois directly,
all there to see:
$ whois -h whois.gandi.net ...

https://news.gandi.net/en/2018/05/gdpr-and-whois/
https://news.gandi.net/en/2018/07/changes-in-gandis-private-domain-registration/
"now possible to deactivate Private domain registration from your  
Gandi account. By deactivating Private domain registration, you  
consent to have your contact information published in the public Whois  
database."

Unlike some other registrars that compel one to use a web form and email
(and dear knows what they do with that email data) - and any other data
they might grab that's provided by browser, and don't give registrants
an "opt in" option to make their (customary) whois data public.

So ... seems pretty straight-forward with gandi.net,
basically just the default has changed (and the "privacy protection" is
complementary with registration), and I'm guessing the data goes to
ICANN but they may not be showing it in their public whois (but I've
not fully checked those details, so I may be guessing incorrectly).
In any case, gandi.net's public whois server data is seen in what
ICANN (or likely about anyone) serves up - so it's pretty easy to
follow and get whatever data the registrant has as public in whois.

slightly? OT(?) SF-LUG has no domains with registrar gandi.net

> From: "Michael Paoli" <Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu>
> Subject: whois: sf-lug.org/sf-lug.com & Joker.com: Re: [sf-lug]  
> SF[-]LUG & domain(s) Re: Domain ...
> Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2019 16:47:46 -0700

> shopping for registrars.  I should look at gandi.net again - I've
> multiple (some mine, some [L]UGs) domains there ... see what the
> current situation is, and - as feasible adjust accordingly.  Must say
> I've been quite (if not highly?) pleased with gandi.net ... but I'm