Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet

Dealing With Bad Service From Dedicated Host Providers? 196

Posted by Cliff from the stuff-to-talk-about dept.
zeno_lee asks: "How do people deal with situations like this? Recently, we were cracked because our ISP failed to patch known security holes. They now want us to pay for them to patch up the holes. We are a bunch of dedicated volunteers who run a community web site we are developing using Apache/PHP/MySQL. The volunteers have nothing to gain except the rewards of bringing a national community together. We were cracked twice within 1 week of going live on the site. We are getting service from CommuniTech, who rent us a Cobalt Raq3 server. Part of the reason to go with a dedicate server from an ISP is to outsource system administration. No one amongst us is a full time computer security officer." One would think that when you pay for system administration, that security would be part of the deal. Looking at their FAQ, they give the impression that their servers are secure, so you'd think they would do something as simple as apply patches. Also, there is no mention of any extra charges for security on their pricing page, so does CommuniTech have any sensible reason for charging extra?

"We were cracked first within 5 days of our site going live. After paying communitech.net $62.50 for reinstalling the OS, it was cracked just 24 hours later. After speaking with Cobalt, they told us that our ISP, communitech.net, failed to patch up well publicized security holes on the Raq3. Acknowledging their failure, Communitech is not charging us for reinstalling the OS, but they are charging us $125 for someone to patch up the security hole. How blatantly unfair is that? I wanted the Slashdot community to be aware of the practices of such companies and see if others have had similar experiences and how they dealt with those situations.

We signed a 6 month contract, and we need options and strategies. What are the possible options we have? We just want a website running, we don't need to deal with all this bull."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dealing With Bad Service From Dedicated Host Providers? More

Dealing With Bad Service From Dedicated Host Providers?

Comments Filter:

  • Bad admins (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I may have missed something, but I didn't see 1 word regarding that communitech is responsible for the server. What often happens is that the customer doesn't realize that they are responsible for the server, COMPLETELY responsible. I work for a webhosting company that uses the POS RaQx, and the dedicated customers are responsible for the machine, not us. We do offer Managed service also, for which we are completely responsible for. So, in the end, don't get a server if you don't know how to administer it AND DON'T USE THE RAQx, they are horrendous.
  • I had a shared account with them, and they advertised "unlimited bandwidth" - as soon as I got over 2GB a day, they cut me off. I asked them why, and they said because I had violated their terms of service by placing zip files on the server. This is a complete load of crud because that was NOT in their terms of service! After I pointed this out to them, that they were full of it and placing requirements that were not there originally, they added it to their terms of service and left me kicked off. I think they have full time forum moderators, as when I was with them, in their now "private" support forums, every other post was a technical problem and every OTHER post was a problem with communitech imposing restrictions that weren't there to begin with. It's a sorry hosting company where you're punished for having traffic.

    Another thing I may mention is their supposedly "private" reseller plan. When I was with them, they basically disclosed to all their resold accounts (IE: accounts sold by their resellers w/out the end customer knowing it was through communitech) that their current "host" was just a reseller for communitech, and that they could get better prices dealing directly with communitech.

    Unfortunately, most hosts I've dealt with have similar problems. I had a good experience with I-Interactive, but then one day they stopped responding to my technical requests, the server came down for a while, then came back up. Apparently they had sold their business and now it's a joke...

  • Dedicated Server vs Managed Server (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is clearly a dedicated server, not a managed server. Communitech shouldn't be charging you for patches, that's supposed to be taken care of when you take posession of the machine. It's they're fault it was compromised again, and they need to get their head out into the open air before they lose a customer. However, if it's a dedicated server, you're on your own after that. If you want someone to manage the security of your box, you get to pay for that. It's called managed services and it likely results in you losing root access to the machine -- or in my case signing a form that says I have root, but if I screw the machine up, I pay. All these comments about "all hosting providers suck" is hogwash. There are *tons* of well run companies that ask "how high?" when you yell JUMP. I host with a smallish outfit in Detroit. (Developers Choice). They manage my machine and have paged me to let me know they're applying patches and inside the box. Sheepishly, I admit I installed a stupid postcard script for a virtual host I have and it was vulnerable and the box was compromised. They knew about it, shut the intruders out, called me on my cell phone to ask what I wanted to do about it. They had the box restored in a couple hours and fixed the script. They sent me a bill with a letter from their muckety muck explaining security precautions (even though it was a bit condescending, I appreciated the tips). If you want service, it's out there. You're just not going to find it for free.

  • $1k Hardware + free software = $5k (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    In cobalt's defense they have done a lot of work on their GUI management tools. They don't just throw a pile of hardware and open source software together and resell it. They do add a lot of value to their systems, and don't seriously over charge for it.
  • Brad - the question is about RaQ 3 from Cobalt..

    When did you hear last time that Cobalt is running on Windows? it's only running Linux and their new ones running on Solaris.

    Of course - you can grab such a machine and slap Windows NT/2000 on it, but whats the point?
  • From my experience - you'll find with Apache a MUCH more reponsive answer, instructions for workaround - and in most of the times - a patch WITHIN few hours...

    With MS stuff (and I had the "pleasure" to be in that situation) - first they argue with you that you are wrong, and it doesn't exist, then when they are convinced that there is something true in what you say - their workaround is ...funny ("disable Java on your clients"), and most of the time the patches comes either after few days at minimum, and even when they issue a patch, they're not checking it well (service pack 6 on Win NT, anyone? or the latest security fix which won't apply on many machines...)

    Sorry, but MS still doesn't "get it" on security in my book.

  • A website is cracked.
    A cipher is cryptanalyzed.
    --
  • Really? This must be something limited to the RaQ3's then. On my Cobalt RaQ4r, by default, the CGI's are run under CGIWrap and run get setuid to the person that owns the scripts.. i.e. the site owner usually.
  • Exodus is a fucking pain in the ass. Don't even bother. You'd think if you're building 1000 sqft of space you'd get some respect? Hardly. They screw up everything, refuse to fix it, tell you you ordered it wrong, and got to great lenghts to tell you how much better they are then the comptetion and how most of the people working there have their MCSE. I couldn't contain myself after that. I've got 3 other colo spaces with 3 other providers. Exodus is the wortst. Overpriced idiots.

    kashani
  • Disclaimer: I work for Rackspace as a Developer, and like it :-)

    From what I've seen of Rackspace from talking to sales and support, they are very concerned about being the best at what they do. But they don't do what you want them to do; you wanted someone else to do administration and security for you.

    I would probably just go with Debian and a managed hosting solution (like Rackspace) and then ask someone who is very knowledgable about security to lock down your site. You won't need new security administration until you upgrade to the next Debian version. Don't forget to subscribe to debian-security-announce, too.

    I'm sorry, but it costs money to have someone maintain security. And this CT company ain't willing to give away what skills they have. Though it doesn't sound like they play a fair ball game.

    Ciao!

  • Disclaimer: I'm on Rackspace's payroll, I'm a Linux developer, and I really like it. I'm not speaking as a representative of Rackspace in anyway, shape, or form... just an employee who takes pride in his company.

    Rackspace may be fine today, I don't know. But it wasn't that long ago that almost all of their servers were vulnerable to Bind NXT attacks.

    I guess it's all relative, but I believe that was back in late January... and the bind NXT hole was eventually plugged up on every server where the customer allowed us to do the upgrade for him/her. Since this was a major remote exploit, we ended up with a bunch of folks working overtime to perform the upgrades. Any server you see vulnerable now (at least on the Linux side) has a customer that has been informed of the risks but chosen not to upgrade or let us upgrade for whatever reason.

    I sent them email on it and got no response at all.

    Where'd you send it? I'd be highly interested in finding out where the break down was... I certainly don't want us to get a rep for ignoring folks who are trying to be helpful.

    Thanks for trying to give us a heads up, though.

  • Well, you're making an assumption that it isn't. In my experience contracts range all over the place, what's true for ISP A isn't necessarily true for ISP B.

    They really need to seek legal counsel and have them review the contract. Their obligations should be spelled out in there, although the ramifications of the specific legalese requires a lawyer to interpret. (grumble)
  • Since it seems like someone actually found this interesting, I thought I'd go ahead and post the actual link [google.com] to the google service (AdWords.) Of course, clicking through, in their estimate of how much it would cost to attach your banner to the "communitech" keyword, it would appear that no one actually searches for communitech so maybe this isn't such a hot idea :) Still, especially if very few people search for communitech, this is a low-cost way to get your point across.
    ~luge
    ~luge
  • buy one of those cheap ad banners on google and set it to come up every time someone searches "communitech." Have it link to a page where you've collected a list of your problems (and hopefully the problems of others, to give it more credibility.) Make it look very professional; avoid getting personal; etc., and pretty soon you'll have solutions.

  • The people at communitech are idiots (Score:3)

    by Kiwi ( 5214 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @11:51AM (#308344) Homepage Journal
    The people at communitech are idiots.

    From http://www.communitech.net/hosting/virtual/plans/u nix.cgi [communitech.net]:

    UNIX varies in several factors. Though the history of UNIX is based on GNU, or free, unsupported software; free is not always good. When dealing with critical applications, free, and unsupported can be a threat, rather than a benefit. The popularity of Red Hat LINUX, especially with other hosting companies is merely due to profitability, and not scalability or support. While Red Hat LINUX may be quite popular, the fact is that it is unsupported and unstable in mass virtual hosting. Sun Microsystems Solaris 7 is a true 64-bit Operating System, and is backed and supported by a Fortune 500 company. While our competition may take a cheap route through Red Hat LINUX and Intel-based hardware, we choose to take the reliable path, in the best interest of our clients.

    These people are obviously ignorant of Sun's own history. Sun caught on in the 1980s--not because it was the most stable, not because it was the most secure, but because Sun's software was the most open. Sun's success in the 1980s and early 1990s can be mainly attributed to the fact that they opened up the code for NFS, the code for the XV windowing toolkit, and the code for the RPC library.

    NFS was, and still is a joke, compared to better systems like AFS. However, the popularity of PC-compatible hardware shows that it is not the best that wins in the computing marketplace, but the cheapest and most open.

    The statistics prove this: Linux is gaining market share. Solaris is losing market share.

    - Sam

  • ...is not due to Sun open sourcing their toolkits for NFS and XV and such; it's due to that fact that they all but give the OS away with their servers. And SUN servers, frankly, kick ass, which is why they sell so many of them.

  • When you lease a dedicated server, you're getting a box and the root password, on a network of some sort, plugged into some power.

    • Unlimited bandwidth? Heh. You're going to get limited to 100mbps whether you want to or not. And I doubt you can push that much bandwith anyway. Regardless, "unlimited" simply means "not restricted" in this case, not "without end". So they're telling you that they will not cap your bandwidth. Not that you can use all the bandwidth you want.
    • You want them to admin the system? Isn't this why you leased a colocated server in the first place? So you could admin the server and not have to worry about physically housing the box? Because that's all you're leasing - a home for the box. If someone broke into my house, I wouldn't call my alarm company and tell them I wanted them to come *3 my alarm panel every night before I went to bed...that's just stupid

    As far as the rest, bail on the contract, tell your credit card company to stop payments to them, and go find someone else. Colocation services, really, are a dime a dozen, like dialup ISP's were a few years ago. Of course, that assumes you can move. You didn't set up your DNS so that they are responsible for yout domain, too, did you?

  • Contract (Score:1)

    by zin ( 7049 )
    A few words of advice. Read your contract..... If you have any hope of getting it done for free, it's gonna be in the contract. Don't forget the ISP has to pay someone to patch your box as well... Personally I think that System/OS maintance is part of the dedicated services, but feelings play no role in business.....
  • This is my biggest fear about Debian. I use it all the time (it's the only distro I'll use for pretty much anything), but there are easy, EASY pitfalls to fall into.

    First of all, NEVER cron apt-get dist-upgrade. Cron apt-get update, if you want, but that's kind of a waste of bandwidth if you're not updating every day. I've had things like SSH break totally because the SSH maintainer f**cked up the packages (this is not, in fact, uncommon; ssh breaks more than any other package I've ever insatlled) - cronning it will pretty much ensure that if ssh goes to hell, no one is logged in to fix it, and you will need to talk to tech support and get them to log in via console (assuming, of course, they can do so), since you won't have telnet installed (I hope I hope).

    Secondly, don't assume that just because you run dist-upgrade, you're secure. Go to the Debian Documentation Project [debian.org] and read the Securing Debian Manual [debian.org]. While you're there, read the Debian System Administrator's Manual [debian.org] and the Debian Network Administrator's Manual [debian.org]. Debian may be awesome in most respects, but Potato (2.2) comes with a general setup, not a secure one (though it could certainly be worse).

    Debian's pitfall is users assuming that all is well in all cases. This is not true. You need to be just as vigilant with Debian as with other distributions; the difference, however, is that when something needs to be done in Debian, it's usually easier and faster to do. You still need to be on guard; check conf files after debconf creates them, make sure and set passwords on things like mysql, and be wary of the unstable branch (use testing instead), and things should work out for you.

    Debian saves you time, but never think it does everything, or you will be rooted faster than RH5.2 on a default install.

    ~Sentry21~

  • Re:Switch (Score:2)

    by t ( 8386 )
    Obviously you didn't read the last paragraph since "6 month contract" is pretty clear.
  • Because they were signed a contract for X months of service - and can't just back out without having to pay out that contract, most likely.
  • While I agree that they're a bunch of incompetent idiots for not including security updates as part of the base service, both for customer goodwill and for the numerous problems that can arise from having hosts on your network that are script-kiddie-bait, I have to point out that people also should be free to sign contracts with incompetent idiots if they choose, and businesses should be free to contract to provide piss-poor service.

    It's the nature of a free country and a free economy; people have to be free to pay other people to do stupid things, as long as those stupid things are what was agreed to.

    The host didn't say in their contract that they would keep up the patches, so the customer's legitimate bitch is pretty narrow.

    Next time, they should make sure this is included in the contract, and not do business with anybody who won't.

    On other hand, you will *NOT* find a contract that assumes responsibility for keeping the systems secure; no company in their right mind would agree to that. What they will do is agree to keep up with the latest patches from the OS vendor in a timely manner. "In a timely manner" of course would be expected to be fought out in court after the fact.

    Oh; and while I am a highly-paid information security professional with a Fortune 500 company, I am not now, nor have I ever been, an attorney.

    -
  • I'm feeling generous today, so it's time to feed a lonely old troll...

    What APACHE cracked? How come when an apache server is cracked, the slashdot crowd says "who were these idiots who can't apply patches!" but when an IIS server is cracked and people say "they haven't applied the patches, cluess admins!" those folks get either flamed or modded into oblivion? The double standard is really getting old and the reason I don't read /. very often anymore...

    1. There is no "Slashdot crowd". We all disagree, many times vehemently, on just about every topic you can imagine. Closed vs. open source, Linux vs. xBSD, KDE vs. GNOME, Perl vs. python, mySQL vs. postgreSQL; you nameit, at least half a dozen flamewars on /. have occurred over it.

    2. You can't even come up with a compelling rant; where is the double standard here? Using your own words...

    Apache: when an apache server is cracked, the slashdot crowd says "who were these idiots who can't apply patches!"

    IIS: when an IIS server is cracked and people say "they haven't applied the patches, cluess admins!"

    It seems to me that your rhetorical "Slashdot crowd" is saying that it's the admin's fault in both cases.

    3. If /. is so painful for you to read, leave. You're only wasting your time and ours posting mindless gripes. But then again, that's the only thing a good troll does anymore...

    Jay (=
  • I will be the first to say that that is NOT RH. It uses rpm, but that's about where it stops.

    I've recently been doing a lot of sysadmin work on Raq 3's, and it is a completely different layout than I find on a RH box (still Unix, yes, but RH-like, you're really pushing it)
  • yes, but how many people in the world actually check with the better business bureau prior to making a purchase? .01%? .1%?

    They're basically a useless bunch of people, attempting to keep themselves in business through collecting dues... "well, if you don't pay us our dues, we can't say that you're a member and if anyone calls asking we'll say that you refused membership"... it's almost blackmail, given their reputation...
  • The problem with having your remote box doing apt get updates via cron is you end up breaking shit all the time without realizing it. More than once the latest and greatest package has its own set of bugs you just unknowingly stuck on your box. Stick with an older heavily patched version of a deamon that is well documented. Switching to new code constantly is only going to open up security holes you don't know about.
  • It's been my experience that few webhosting providers will take any responsibility or initiative in protecting their customers. Managed hosting, however, seems to imply that the "manager" would be responsible for maintaining a secure server. Kind of like a Mailboxes, Etc. remaining responsible for theft of mail from a rented drop box...

    The answer I have won't help if you're already stuck in a six-month contract - the contract needs to spell out who is responsible for applying patches, and what the timeline for applying those patches should be, among other things (turnaround time for a request to add an account to a server would be another sticky point for "managed hosting.")

    If it's just a co-located box, you're SOL.
  • Be that as it may, you also have to realize that this happened once before already. Is it so unreasonable for them to fix a security hole once the server has been hacked using it?
    No, this sounds like a case of a business actually trying to screw the customer by double-charging--charging for reinstalling the OS and charging for applying a security patch, and one that really wouldn't take much time anyway.
    But the main point is, even if they don't promise security or anything, I disagree with some of your statements. Maybe it is reasonable for them to reinstall the OS for a charge. But then on top of that demanding a charge to patch the security hole is absurd.
  • Don't go with 9netave.ca (or 9netweb.ca, or whatever they're calling themselves this week)
    They moved my site to concentric networks, which makes me log in to www.xo.com so service my space.
    When I wanted to cancel it, I sent email to them (xo), then had to send it to cnchost.com, then to 9netave, who then told me to call a local number. They told me to email w3corp.com. This was a month ago.
    As of today,it's still all up and running. Morons.

    Pope

    Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
  • (816)300-4678

    They've got some great music on their sales line. Ask a sales rep some hard questions :)

  • Love to get some recommendations for larger co-lo/dedicated spots, cheap bandwidth is a must. Have also been following ttp://www.cogentco.com/, seems to cheap to be true... Anyone with experience? AZ
  • Found the same thing... Their bandwidth pricing alone is incredible...
  • Call (816) 300-4678 and ask to speak to dedicated support. You'll get a sense of their hold times. Then ask them a few innocent questions about how secure their stuff is, and be reasurred when they answer all is taken care of. Then stop and think, and then laugh like a maniac :)
  • I've been a customer for far longer than 3 years.

    Their quickserv pricing is a joke. Their overusage charge runs OVER $8 per GB. That is rediculous frankly, we push a couple thousand GBs a month and would be quickly broke at that rate. A good place should hit $3/gb or $2/gb, they are FOUR TIMES more expensive.

  • Take a look at any place like rackspace.com or dellhost.com, or maxim.net.

    Maxim.net charges $250 mbit == 320GB a month or 10GB a day. Let's say we push above 4mbits. At maxim thats gonna cost $1000.

    At pair that 1200GB is gonna be much more expensive. Reduce it to 1000GB/month because of the 60GB a month they give you. Then you have an overage of 33GB a day which costs $8250!

    For us, this decision is trivial. I'll take that $7,000 a month or $84,000 a year any day.

    Now, the hardware they give you doesn't even come close to the hardware dellhost would give you for the same price, and if you ARE lower bandwidth dellhost includes a gig or two free every day as well.

    Then ask whether you have full access to your box including easy 24x7 reboot in 5 minutes or less. Dell provides that at a much lower cost.

    In fact, I can see almost NO price point and NO usage pattern that makes pair quickserves a good deal. That is suprising for any hosting company, and especially pathetic at pair because we were with them for a long time.

    Finally, when you call them up to get some quickservers setup, you'll find that instead of next day provisioning you get at a place like dellhost.com, you'll get a who knows, especially for an order of more than one server (we run 4 duel CPU's and a quad xeon with 2g of ram plus a single PIII for admin.)

    I'm suprised they have any business whatsover, but I suspect most of the new .coms never do any business planning in the first place, so don't have a clue what costs should be.

    I'll respectifully disagree with your very very cheap description. More like incredible ripoffs to idiots silly enough to fall for it.

  • Simple Solutions to Complex Problems... (Score:4)

    by augustz ( 18082 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @11:24AM (#308365)
    Remember, whatever they claim about full managed hosting and experts on site, the people you call at 3AM in the morning will only be capable of rebooting your computer, if you are lucky. If not they'll ask you to wait till Monday at 8AM, while your credit card and customer information streams over the net.

    Unlimited bandwidth = joke. Call them, tell them you'll be hosting a huge file archive and expect to push 1,000GB a month per server minimum, for that $200 monthly cost. Laugh while they root around and discover the magic document that turns unlimited into super limited and we can cut you off without notice just as you become popular.

    Uptime promises = joke, even if they are in writing. Usually they claim it was an outside problem even if THEIR router failed, and the amount you get if they break their SLA is pathetic.

    Security is a joke. Our current Top 5 dedicated hosting provider allows easy access to all customer accounts, and I mean easy, no hacking, no passwords, nothing. It's so easy it's not even newsworthy. I like it because I never have to logon, passwords are a pain. And they have yet to patch a security hole either.

    Don't sign super long contracts. Rackspace charges an arm and a leg and are doing great. Why? One reason is they go month by month, they've got an incentive to keep you, and I suspect it makes a difference.

    Anyone find a really good and cheap dedicated hosting provider? I'd love a place where we could buy our own set of 10 servers, and just pay for the space and the bandwidth, and have it be cheap. With a proper telephone remote-reboot, we could do everything else ourselves, which we already have to do because the emergency support are basically script readers in Kajikastan I think.

  • Rackspace may be fine today, I don't know. But it wasn't that long ago that almost all of their servers were vulnerable to Bind NXT attacks.

    I sent them email on it and got no response at all.

    So basically, because of that I wouldn't be surprised if they really are just as clueless as Communitech, just bigger :)
  • This is one for lawyers. It all boils down to the contract.

    The best outcome would probably be for you to find out that they probably breached the contract by demanding more money for somethign that is part of 'administration' and simply get a pro-rated refund, and move your service elsewhere.

  • posting a very negative comment about them on Slashdot, where tons of sysadmins and web developers hang out? The negative publicity should more than make up for any profit they get from slacking off... Oh, wait...
  • A friend of mine runs several personal websites. He does not charge users money for using his sites, and therefore only relies on ad revenue (and we know how that can be these days). He used to use Web2010.com until a couple of his sites got popular enough to warrant Web2010 to give him the "you're using too much bandwidth" excuse for asking him to move to another hosting plan. Even though his plan was advertised as "unlimited bandwidth". Web2010.com did a nice thing in retrospect to the fact that they "lied" in their advertisements. They provided him with 90 days to move the site to another hosting plan with them. He chose to move to a dedicated server...on another host. This is where Rackspace came in to play. They set his box up and contacted him to give him the info he needed. He tried to log in to it, nothing. They wanted to charge him to fix the problem! After a day of calls, they fixed it without charge. Then, they had set PERL up on the box, but had done something wrong and none of his PERL scripts would run. Again, they wanted to charge him! There were several other situation like this and he finally got things worked out and the sites are operating just fine. It's a shame he stayed with them, IMO, because it didn't drive home the point that the company was treating him badly. I can agree with some of the readers here that the website owners shouldn't expect too much, the FAQ and other info I read doesn't indicate any responsibility, but I am really aggravated by the number of companies that won't take the time to own up to some things. If they knew of the problem and offered to reinstall the OS for a charge, they should have at least patched those holes when they did that. To let them get hacked again, try to charge them for the OS installation again, and then try to charge them for fixing the security hole(s) is just plain wrong. I wish I could recommend another host/provider, but I can't even recommend the only one I've ever had experience with. Good luck!

  • Comment removed (Score:3)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @11:51AM (#308370)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • According to Communitech's site, their guarantee [communitech.net] includes,

    "CommuniTech.Net extends a 30-day unconditional cancellation guarantee to all dedicated server clients, regardless of the contract term length."

    You didn't say how long you have currently been with them, but you seem to imply that you're fairly new with them, so I hope this helps!
  • In practical terms, a dedserv ISP will do patches on OS software in bulk at specified intervals. It may be that the patch desired would have been installed during the next scheduled time for patching that box, which may be done weekly, once a month or once every two months, etc., depending on how many servers they have to maintain and how much staff they have (their problem, not yours, but simply a possible explanation).

    Now, if you call the ISP and demand that they install a patch Immediately If Not Sooner, they probably charge you time & labor for this work which is essentially special attention to the box, as it breaks from the set patching schedule (which probably is part of your service agreement).

    I dunno the Communitech patching and service scheme, but this seems a likely answer to the question, which is obviously coming from an upset and nervy customer.

    --

  • I think we're missing some important info. Are the known security holes being referenced holes in the initial setup that the host is providing or are the security holes in the software that the webmasters installed on the box?

    I'd absolutely expect a host to make sure whatever they provide is secure and to not charge extra to make sure their software is secure.

    However if you install your own custom software onto the box, then it is your responsibility for any problems that software may cause.

    That is unless the hosts somehow claimed something as stupid as "you install it, we support it!" in their contract. That is one hell of a lot of software to support.

    Like many other people here I've been involved in colos for years with a few different providers. In every case that was how things worked.

    -Steve Gibson
  • Service levels come in three flavors.

    Managed server - Server is provided and maintained by the hosting company in question. You may or may not have root access.
    Dedicated server - Server is provided, but the level of administration provided by the hosting company should be discussed. Unless requested, I would expect NO interference from the hosting company. You should always have root access.
    Colocated server - Same as above, except the customer provides the server too.

    Updates and patches are usually (maybe not usually? it's usual for where I work, Site5 [site5.com], atleast) by the hosting company anyway, without a charge.

    Some things are charged for, and should be - But just keeping a system up to date (which will also keep 90% of the script kiddies at bay - I'm not implying an uptodate system is a secure system, however) should be standard practise at all hosting providers.

    What happened with CommuniTech, under any other circumstances, I would put down to miscomunication - As in, the host thought that the client wanted to handle things themselves. But CommuniTech have what I wouldn't call the best reputation. :)
    Search for CommuniTech at Webhosting talk [webhostingtalk.com], and you'll see what I mean.
  • i believe that there are two relevant principles. the first is the duty and standard of care and you get what you pay for.

    when you said
    We were cracked twice within 1 week of going live on the site... and later One would think that when you pay for system administration, that security would be part of the deal.

    Your provider has a duty of care. they demonstrate that this duty or obligation [under contract] is accepted by limiting

    1. phyiscal access to the servers
    2. requiring use of passwords and
    3. validating your identity before disclosing personal information
    I will assume that these three standards are already met.

    the duty of care can be applied to the network and server security in the same manner that you would reasonably expect physical security. when the provider demonstraties that they are concerned about physical security, a standard of care is established.

    a breach of the duty of care is a serious issue.

    when you said:
    We were cracked first within 5 days of our site going live. After paying communitech.net $62.50 for reinstalling the OS, it was cracked just 24 hours later.

    This established that you did advise the provider of the problem and they do havd a duty to resolve this issue. the second point is that the providers action did not resolve the issue. if you were charged $62.50 and promised that this action would resolve the security issue then demand your money back. any reasonable hosting provider would be pro-active in the installation of OS patches which leads to my second point of you get what you pay for.

    Solutions

    1. if you have root access, update the software yourself. you didn't indicate that you have root access.
    2. if you don't have root access then the onus is on the provider to update and not just reinstall the OS and the next issue becomes payment according to your contact.
      • if a fee is stated for security related matters or for applying software patches then you'll have to pay for installing the patch.
      • if a fee is not stated then you can negotiate the fee. advise your provider of the standard and duty of care which a purdent Judge would find applies if the provider were to be sued.

    if you know/are a law student then standard and duty of care are discussed in Donahuge V Stevenson 1932 All ER Rep1 (HL)]

  • "That said, the security of your box is your responsibility. It doesn't matter where your box is located or whose pipes it's connected to. "

    If there was an understanding that security was to be handled by the ISP then it's NOT your responsibility. You are paying them for a service and it's their responsibility. That's what service contracts are for so you can let someone else handle the problem.
  • Debian plus psionic.com.

    Go to psionic.com and download their free tools logcheck is an official potato package but portsentry is not (it's in woody). Either way you can either download the tar file or the deb from debian and install them.

    Then go to The Trinity document [csuchico.edu] and do some reading.

    After that you should be able to defend yourself from most attacks.
  • Actually, IDC's numbers show that both Linux and Solaris have been gaining market share, at the expense of all of the other Unixes (and NOT at the expense of Windows).

    One way to interpret this is that the Unix market is consolidating around Linux and Solaris.
  • Part of the reason to go with a dedicate server from an ISP is to outsource system administration. No one amongst us is a full time computer security officer
    If the original agreement with the ISP was that the ISP would admin the box and keep it secure, it doesn't matter how hard up they are. If a company promises something and does not deliver, they should either do it properly or refund. We have our firewalling and hosting outsourced, it's not cheap, but the agreement is that we do not need to do "weekly or even daily checking for new holes, fixing old holes, testing for weaknesses, logging everything, searching the logs for the unknown, etc, etc". That is why we pay them rather than fdisk a PC somewhere and hope package maintainers are reasonably prompt in fixing stuff. It works well because the same security can be applied to a truck load of other sites who also use the service and we pay less for a lot more security than we could afford to do on our own.

    Of course some responsibility needs to fall on the buyer. If someone offers you a Porsche for $29.95, you shouldn't be suprised if it is not what you expected.

    Xix.

  • I work for an ISP that provides multiple levels of web server hosting. There's managed, where the customer has limited access on a server that they rent from us. We take full responsiblity for patching the server which ever OS they choose. If they go with the dedicated server, they have full root access. Even though they are still renting the hardware from us (which we maintain) they have to take care of patching the OS and any software on it. Then if the customer requires us to help them apply a few patches, we charge for our time.
  • Did the contract you signed make any statements about security upgrades? I read over their FAQ and it does not lead me to believe that they would do that. To the contrary, it basically says "we're as secure as any other unix platform but a determined cracker can get in".

    I've been a victim of contract assumptions in the past. Never ever ever expect a contractual partner to do something that will cost him money (in material or labor) unless its explicitly stated.

    SuperID
    Free Database Hosting [freesql.org]
  • Yup, I think that Communitech covered themselves quite nicely with 7.2:

    "Exclusions. Maintenance and support services shall not include services for problems arising out of (a) tampering...."


    SuperID
    Free Database Hosting

  • Managed Service = Looking after the server, including applying security patches.

    They purchased a sysadmin package, so that the hosting prover supply sysadmin for the box.
  • So:

    - power outage - don't they have a backup generator? Always find out about backup electricity when co-locating.
    - $850 for 2 boxes per month co-location with unlimited bandwidth - even in the UK you can pay £3100 per year (under $500 per month) for unlimited bandwidth for a box (4U or under), with a reputable provider (clara.net) who know what they are doing.

    Anyway, American in store service may be great, but America doesn't match many other countries for tech support. Anyway, in a few months time when the recession bites home in America, there will be plenty of high quality techs available, and service will improve. :)
  • So were are you hosting your multi-gigabyte/day site ?

    Provided your site doesn't exceed the cap-bandwidth (which, at 2 GB/day, is quite high for 99.9% of the sites out there), the Quickserve are very very cheap with all you inside (rented hardware, support and reliable power/connection).
  • Anyone find a really good and cheap dedicated hosting provider?

    Go to www.quickserve.com (Pair Networks dedicated servers). For 249 $ you can rent a Duron box with 30 GB disk, 2 GB/day bandwidth and support. It's a FreeBSD only company, and usually you don't have root access (that's the price to pay for free REAL & quality support).

    They have a very high availability rate (well over 99.9%), they're the largest independant hosting company. I've been their customer for 3 years and never had the idea of going away !
  • it all boils down to providing good managed services. the hosting company here obviously, in my opinion, faulted in its service agreement. ensuring that their customers are well protected should be one such service they provide. more so since they're _renting_ the cobalt box and not co-locating it on behalf. renting the box implies that they're responsible for it's upkeep due to normal wear and tear.
  • Yeah, yeah. I saw that right after I posted it. I just had to bold it too :(
    ---
  • Doesn't really suck when, even after proofing your message, you don't catch the mistake until after you post. And to do it in bold, no less :(
    ---
  • Well, my previous post has an error too!
    Should be "Doesn't it suck.."

    Oh, to correct your correction, it actually should have been "It is their responsibility..." :o

    Its Beer Ti^H^H^H^H^H^H^HSaturday, what can I say?
    ---

  • Re:So, why the charge? (Score:3)

    by The Original Bobski ( 52567 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @02:30PM (#308391) Homepage Journal
    Well, they specifically said it is a dedicated server. That means that they have leased it, just like you would lease a car. Maintenance, upkeep and system administration is solely the lessors responsibility.

    Visit Cobalt's [cobalt.com] website, subscribe to Cobalt's lists [cobalt.com], especially the announce [cobalt.com] list.
    Search the user list archives [cobalt.com] and discover the unholy number of folks that have been hacked through BIND because they didn't upgrade.

    The fact is, they leased it. It is they're responsibility for the upkeep. It would be a different story if they leased web space, but they didn't.

    Leasing a dedicated server does not absolve you of system administration, but exactly the opposite!

    ---
  • Zeno Lee,

    It's fairly simple. Check your contract. Does it guarantee patches will be installed on build? If not, maybe it should. Escalate the issue to one of their managers; maybe you can convince them to change the policy, and once the policy is changed, you should not be charged. :)

    I happen to work for a fairly large dedicated hosting company, and the majority of the clients that really loathe us simply don't understand the service they've signed up for.

    Just because it's a dedicated server doesn't mean it's a managed server. Dedicated means it's yours; managed means they either fully manage or help to manage the server.

    Personally, I think that the ISP is responsible for providing to you the RAQ3 in the most secure configuration available (ie, with all patches installed on delivery), but once it's delivered, it becomes your responsibility unless your contract says otherwise.

    On a side note, ditch the RAQ3. Cobalt is notoriously bad about providing updates on a timely basis; they didn't release a RAQ3 patch for the recent BIND exploit until three weeks after it had been published on BUGTRAQ.
  • I think you've already gathered some decent bargaining strength in that you have the entire slashdot community waiting for them to fix your problem. Let them know this. You should be able to get a bit more of a fair deal. Remember, the customer (especially with a lot more customers, prospective, past, or current) is always right.
  • Sigh... even more reasons that I hadn't heard yet that Communitech sucks. I never had a problem with ZIP files (and my sites use them extensively), so I'm guessing that they just had a grudge on you and that was the best excuse they could come up with. They do that a lot. BTW, there's absolutely no way you have to pay any of that extra money just because they want you to do so. Ask them to pay you $5000. Tell them the reason, "just because" - after all, that's the reason they're demanding money from you. The only power they have over you is a) the TOS and the agreement you signed, which most certainly doesn't mention anything about additional fees that were never agreed upon, and b) they can take down your website, which they had already done, so they relinquished that power. They have no right to request that money, and you have the right to sue them (well, at least threaten that) or report them to BBB, attorney generals, etc.

    BTW, if you're serious about the site dedicated to "showing the truth" behind CT (or possibly, a general site to uncover dark secrets of other bad companies) then I'll definitely join you. My CT hell ended over a year ago, so my hatred for them has somewhat dampened, but I'm still enraged when I think of their company.

  • Communitech Hell (Score:5)

    by at0m ( 56249 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @11:21AM (#308399) Homepage
    I used communitech for a little over a year, and my experience was awful. They kept on taking away services that were promised when I signed up, and refusing to refund anything. They suspended my accounts twice; their policy for suspension is to immediately take the site down and leave a "forbidden" page, then ask questions later. One of the times it was because I was using too much bandwidth - one of the primary reasons I used communitech was because of their promise of "unlimited bandwidth" (I believe they've since changed their policy, without notice of course). The second time it was because I alerted them of a security hole in their system. ALERTED them - I simply wanted it fixed, but they suspended my site. When I called soon after, they threatened to call the police. They guaranteed 99.5% uptime when I signed up, but never met that - later, when questioned, they said that they were working towards that goal, but it wasn't in actually a guarantee (even though it was advertised on their front page). Customer support was horrendous - I'll leave it at that. When I finally canceled my accounts, they continued billing me. They wouldn't stop until I threatened to call the Attorney General of their state (after that, of course, they quite willingly stopped). I could keep going, but I'll leave it at that. Please, whatever you do, get away from Communitech. If you don't, I assure you that you'll regret it later.
  • I have had a dedicated server at Dialtone Internet [dialtoneinternet.com] for over a year, and have been pleased with their service. They have great connectivity, 24 hour monitoring, a ticketing system and reasonable pricing. They don't handle patches under my plan (I handle those via ssh) but I have dealt with their support department several times (reboots, and a hardware failure) and they have been very professional. I did have some difficulty once, straightening out some billing issues with their mostly Spanish-speaking staff in that department. It took two days of faxes and emails and a lot of patience on both sides before we were able to overcome the language barriers and get things in order.

    Anyway, I would definitely recommend Dialtone to anyone looking for a dedicated server.

    --
  • Wouldn't the best way of demonstrating your pissed-ness be to take your business elsewhere? Find another provider.

    Also find a web-host review site or something, and tell the world how bad your current provider sucks.


    --
  • Maybe you could actually READ my comment. I said that the same response is NOT given. People rant on M$ security, how it "sucks" and is "worthless", but say that the admins are cluless in the apache case... BTW, the fact that my response was modded "troll" -1, pretty much does nothing except back up my argument.
    ---

  • Sue them for Malpractise? (Score:3)

    by Greyfox ( 87712 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @11:24AM (#308409) Homepage Journal
    So they're asking you to pay again for something you've already paid for with your base level service, which is remote administration? Part of the job description of "Administration" is keeping the security up to date on the system so that you DON'T get taken over by skript kiddies. If the problem were in your web code, they might have some justification for charging you to fix the problem but if the problem is in the OS/Standard Services installed on the machine, you're already paying them to maintain that. They should refund the original charge for reinstalling the OS, as well, since the problem was their fault.

    It sounds like they're incompetant, which really doesn't surprise me at all. Most companies seem to feel you can train some monkeys to do sysadmin level work. That's not true of any OS, although some of the more "User Friendly" ones delude you into thinking you can, right up until the skript kiddies march in and take over. You have the correct level of expectation that security holes will be fixed as part of what you're paying them to host the site, so if they don't hold up their part of the contract, threaten to sue the crap out of them. Or at least demand that they release you from the contract since they're not upholding their end of the deal. IANAL but I play one on TV.

    As a side note, a lot of these web hosting places are fly by night operations that disappear a couple of months after they open up. The fly-by-nights are much more likely to try to get by with trained monkeys on the sysadmin team. If the guy who sold you your service is also the system administrator, be wary. It's always a good idea to see how long a company's been in business and ideally get some references from other customers of that company before you decide to do business with them.

  • What does the SLA with them say? If the service keeps failing, not thru your fault, sounds like you have a good case that they are breaching the contract, and you can walk away.

    Mind you, I am not a lawyer, although I play one on Televison.
  • Very informative!

  • We try real hard to take care of all the basic stuff for our customers (patches, etc.) at no cost to them.

    We do give our customers root to their servers and we warn them that while one advantage to a dedicated server is that we will maintain the server and keep it running, when they do something boneheaded (like chmod -R bob /) we will bill them to fix it.

    So far it hasn't been a problem and only one customer has actually done something to break the server (see the chmod example above).


    -----

  • I think it can kiss its reputation goodbye he moment this story is on /.
  • You can check webhostingmenu.com [webhostingmenu.com] to find better web hosting.
    It lists plans from FirstWorld, AF Hosting, NYI.net, Hyper Hosting, Verio, Bitserve, ThinkHost, Interliant, and Dell Host. None of these will be as bad as CommuniTech. [/plug]
  • I've had a pair of boxes hosted at Maxim.net for quite a while. The prices are low -- for 2 boxes and 1 dedicated meg (which we can fill 100% all month long for the same price), we pay around $850. These are for boxes we built, so hardware is not included, but that's still pretty impressive. Although I've never remote-rebooted (both boxes up 185 days running linux since they had a power outage 6 mo ago), they have telephone reboot, as well as some services.

    They just merged into a larger company, and they finally got a trouble ticketing system, but customer service is still pretty awful, so its fortunate I rarely need it. They have a few very clued network guys, if you can get them.
  • Cobalt makes their patches available for everyone to download and install

    Also, the cobalt raqs are very easy to patch. They have a GUI, a section to install software (Maintenance/Intall Software). You can just paste the URL of the patch, and it installs it. The patches are here [cobalt.com].

    That said, communitech sucks. I've had problems with them in many other areas too. I can't recomend another ISP that will patch the servers for you, but I can say that communitech sucks.

    --

  • Anyone find a really good and cheap dedicated hosting provider? I'd love a place where we could buy our own set of 10 servers, and just pay for the space and the bandwidth, and have it be cheap.

    Sound like you're looking to rent a rack from somewhere like above.net (or exodus, or level3, etc.). If you're looking for a tier 2 provider rather than one of the tier 1s, take a look at the dicussions at www.webhostingtalk.com in the advertising forum; there are a few people there who are advertising colocation space.

  • Patch it yourself? (Score:3)

    by cperciva ( 102828 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @11:12AM (#308426) Homepage
    Cobalt makes their patches available for everyone to download and install. Sure, it takes them several weeks to make a patch available, and given that they use RedHat GNU/Linux security holes keep popping up, but there is no reason why your ISP should be more able than you to download and apply the patches.

    Of course, I have to wonder why you're using a Raq anyway... I've never quite understood how $1000 of hardware plus lots of free software equals a $5000 server.
  • The short: Hire security experts to monitor your site. Have them notify the provider. If the provider fails to apply the patch within 12 hours, leave them for breech of contract (or something like that)

    The long: A similar thing happened to one of our clients. I work for a web development company and we have over the last year tried to get away from hosting. Its annoying, we don't want to do admin work, etc. so we partnered with a well known hosting provider (with pretty much a similar contract). The box was running NT (not my choice) and the day before they had scheduled to install a patch for a very well known (and for a good amount of time) bug, a script kiddie hacked the site. The first thing the hosting provider did? Blame us AND demand more money to get the site back up. WTF? Anyway, while they scrambled around with their heads cut off, we brought the servers back to our office, brought in security experts we were negotiating a partnership with anyway, and locked down the site and brought it back up (all in 24 hours ;-) ourselves. Then, we had our new security partners go into the hosting providers rack area (the hp let us into the wrong closet first.. *sigh*) and effectively make the provider their bitch. "This is wrong, this is wrong", etc. The client is very happy with us and 5 seconds away from dumping the provider. Since then, the provider has pretty muched asked "how high" when we or the client has said jump.

    psxndc

  • I know that this is a random plug, but I get my service from toolshed51.com [toolshed51.com] The service they provide is excellent, they have the PHP, Apache & mySQL tools installed and they run FreeBSD that is constantly patched for security holes. You should contact them!

    PS--I don't have any affiliation except that I'm a satisfied customer!
  • ...or do you think Solaris sunglasses provide all the light in the world?

  • You need apache, php, and mysql. Many, many hosting providers will have accounts set up around this configuration, allowing you to "just have a website up without all this bull" as you put it. They worry about server admin and security (on the host and network level anyway), all you have to do is write code and pay the bills.

    As an example of a place that has the feature set you're looking for with very generous disk allocations for reasonable prices, see csoft.net [csoft.net]. (I've never used them but I've heard good things about them, and when I emailed them some techie questions about their service they responed quickly and very professionally.) For example, the $25/mo. plan gives you unlimited disk. All plans include 1Gb/day of traffic ($6/Gb per Gb over 30 per month). Anyone here actually, directly used these guys that would like to comment?


    --
    News for geeks in Austin: www.geekaustin.org [geekaustin.org]
  • Just caught this on their website:

    The fact that dedicated server hosting is a port-based service as well as a non-shared hardware environment makes Quality of Service superior over virtual server solutions. Quality of Service on dedicated servers where CommuniTech.Net guarantees the hardware integrity is measured in two aspects. First, Quality of Service is measured at the switch port, ensuring bandwidth is quality and that there is no internal or external network congestion. Secondly, Quality of Service extends to the hardware used for the dedicated server, making sure there are no hardware performance issues. If such issues arise at anytime, it is our responsibility to resolve the hardware issues, which would have an adverse effect on Quality of Service.

    The fact that it is possible (though difficult) to cause a hardware failure through remote software operation is of concern. First, to minimize such circumstances, it is quite important to use only quality hardware in all dedicated servers. Secondly, Quality of Service is exclusive of any software-related issues on the dedicated server, which is the responsibility of the client, not CommuniTech.Net. Therefore, the client, depending on his/her use of the dedicated server, has to carry out the Quality of Service control right down to the application layer.

    They claim quality assurance on the link and the hardware, but not software. They state that is a client responsibility. That is a bit unusual, even assinine, but there you have it.

    Derek
  • I would just like to point out that "chmod -R Rob or Bob or whatever /" would return an error. I think the command you are thinking off is chown.

    SealBeater
  • I agree that they've done a lot of GUI work, but I think suggesting that they're worth $4000 per license is a load of crap.
  • It seems to me that the BBB (Better Buisiness Bereau) was set up to handle situations just like this -- a buisiness doesn't provide services which it said it would. Although it usually doesn't have any official power AFAIK, the power of reputation in this case can be enormous.
  • LOL... CT does suck! I had the same problems with them as above. They would suspend a site, then claim that they sent me reminders. When they finnaly did they sent me a remind and then automatically billed me 2X. They have no security in place. Their PCP (Personal Control Panel) has been know to delte content, email accounts, etc. They also like to spam! Check this out... http://list.cobalt.com/pipermail/cobalt-users/2000 -June/013955.html Overall I would stay away from CT. Especially their Dedicated services. They charge too much for it and give you way too little support and service.
  • The statistics prove this: Linux is gaining market share. Solaris is losing market share.

    Yes, Linux is even gaining popularity over porn according to google:

    (AdWord Keyword search)
    Linux: ~4.5mil impressions/month
    Porn: ~2.5mil impressions/month

  • What's the security-maintenance potential of Debian-based systems? I generally set up Red Hat-based servers at client sites, run a tight ipchains firewall and custom compile whatever daemons will be publicly available from the latest source; and then watch for security news, compiling updated daemons as necessary. So, far, no problems, fingers crossed. But I've recently been playing with Debian, am coming to like .deb far better than .rpm, and wonder what the odds would be of a daily "apt-get dist-upgrade" in cron on server's keeping security relatively tight (and not sometimes mucking things up)? Some of y'all must be doing this?
  • Some how I am sure that if lots of folks contacted them via their public contact points, informing them of the PR problem they have, and if someone brought this to the attention of the local Consumer Reports program on the Local TV station ...

    There might be a reaction.

    Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip

  • A good security reference, and some comments (Score:5)

    by ShaunC ( 203807 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @01:18PM (#308474)
    You'd do well to read this guide, it's helped me out tremendously:

    http://www.openna.com/resources/articles/v1.3-xm l/ coverpage.html

    (Securing and Optimizing Linux, by Gerhard Mourani)

    First let me say that I'm a reseller for Communitech, virtual accounts only, though I don't believe that makes me biased toward them; if anything, my experiences have biased me against CT. I've had my own nightmares with them and I'm still wrapped up in being double-billed on one resold account for almost a year. Personally I think you're lucky they reinstalled the OS for free the second time around; be sure to double-check your credit card bill when it comes in... CT is one of those companies you love and hate at the same time and their customer service does suck - that's why they have a lot of resellers. We can provide the personal service and support that they aren't capable of.

    That said, the security of your box is your responsibility. It doesn't matter where your box is located or whose pipes it's connected to.

    Communitech isn't responsible for making sure your box is secure any more than RoadRunner is responsible for making sure my local linux machine is locked down. Their responsibility is to make sure that your machine is connected, powered up, and able to serve traffic. When you order a dedicated server from CT, they slap on an installation of your chosen OS, along with Apache and some development tools. They don't make any promises or guarantees that your system will be secure or that they'll be patching your box every time an exploit is found.

    CT still uses Redhat 6, and it says that on their dedicated server config page (the RaQ page just says Linux 2.2, but the more general pages indicate they're using Redhat 6). If I were to take on a box with a fresh installation of RH6, the first thing I'd do is upgrade bind - shot in the dark, but I bet that's how you were owned.

    In any case, the bottom line is this, and you're free to disagree: if no one in your group is prepared to spend time finding patches and securing the box, your group isn't ready to be running a dedicated server.

    Good luck and make sure to check that URL. You've got a dedicated server for at least a few more months, someone on your team needs to read up and get to work :)

    Shaun

  • Communitech Dedicated Server Contract (Score:4)

    by DaneelGiskard ( 222145 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @12:30PM (#308481) Homepage
    Here [communitech.net] is the dedicated server contract from Communitech.

    It seems that 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3 are covering the software maintainance. Altough they are not very specific on it.

  • Re:If you really want to do something about it... (Score:3)

    by Courageous ( 228506 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @04:44PM (#308487)
    Get a log book. Record details about all negative
    customer relations incidents, including duplicate
    billing, services retracted, and so forth. Then
    sue. Extensive written records will trump anything
    they say, and as long as you avoid acting like a
    child, you'll be believed by judge and jury.

    C//
  • Dump communitech and go with Rackspace.com. I was researching places like this awhile back for a little project I was working on, and I only heard good things about rackspace.com.

    I'll second that. They're definitely more expensive than the bargain-basement hosting huts, but the it's well worth the money. We've got a growing number of machines over there. The service has been trouble-free (not a single outage that I'm aware of) and they've been very responsive when we've needed someone to go kick the server in the middle of the night.

  • Woah - someone had a bad experience with Communitech? I'm surprised. Wait, just the opposite of that. Communitech (known as "Communistech" by the little online cliche I'm a part of) is a company which loves changing its TOS and being sneaky/deceitful about it just to make a quick buck. First, according to one of their abuse department guys, the 'president' of the company went through a friend's site, SimStuff.com. Without consulting the owner, he deleted the entire site (including several dozen hosted sites) because they had .ZIP files that MIGHT have been pirated software. The company also said that SimStuff.com had 'pornographic' content on it. Er - since when is a site about SimCity 'pornographic'? And what site doesn't use .ZIP files, especially if it's a gaming site? The company eventually changed its position to that of "the owner was inappropriately using his space" - by having .ZIP files available for download. When I posted news about this incident on my Maxis-related site, I was harassed in my forums by an employee of the company (though I don't remember the specifics; they used a fake name to post it originally, but I was able to trace the IP back to the company.) The site was killed because the company decided that .ZIP files are pirated files and then lied about the content of the site. The company also refused to refund the owner of the site, despite the fact that they made a clear mistake and then lied about it (and then went as far as to harass supporters of the site). The company didn't return phone calls from the webmaster and it took him several days to even get an answer as to why his site was simply deleted. From what I recall, they also threatened to charge the webmaster a $500 "cleaning up" fee (I'm not sure about that number - but it was rather large) for deleting the site. I was harassed after proposing that members of the community donate money to pay for that fee in case they pressed it. And the reason they threatened to do it was because they felt the webmaster was 'harassing' them because I, and others, had posted the email addresses of various company officials for people to write them and ask them to reverse their decision. They also threatened to charge money for each of those emails sent in, as well as file abuse reports to our ISPs. Not to mention the fact that they got rid of one of the guaranteed features, Ultraboard, in the middle of my hosting period; thus, when their server screwed up my config styles, I couldn't re-install the program and thus had to ditch my forums. Communitech exists to make a quick buck. They lie about their features and twist their 'contract' and 'terms of service' around just to cheat people. I'm more than willing to help out any site dedicated to reviewing Communitech's poor decisions and actions. I can probably even host the site on a server we rent from another company. Email me: adam@!nozone.net. (Remove the "!").

  • So, why the charge? (Score:3)

    by wraithgar ( 317805 ) on Saturday April 07, 2001 @11:14AM (#308511) Homepage Journal
    What is their justification for the $125 Charge? You say you rent the Raq3, do they mean to imply that this is something you could do yourself, and they will do it for you?

    Just where does the boundary in your contract lie on that? If you are allowed to do the patch yourself, then there may be ~some~ justification for the charge (that doesn't make it right, mind you). However, if it's something they won't let you do, then they are exercising quite an unfair business practice. A bit of a Catch-22 where they won't let you fix it, it needs to be fixed, and they still want to charge you for it.

    If the second option is true (You don't have access to patch the server), I'm sure if you call and complain enough, they'll work something out. Just remember to bug them A LOT!!! They'll buckle, escpecially if you're right, and they know it, and you can plant the seed in their heads that any court would know it too
    -----
  • You're being treated incredibly unfairly and without the contract, they'd have lost your patronage a long time ago. Since companies deplore a bad image, go farther than informing the /. community. Create a site that explains the history in detail of your situation and post links to it on newsgroups and message boards. Go far as you can, just short of slander.

    You might want to check out cr0wbar's rant against Safe Audit [detonate.net] when they screwed him over. The more you let people know about this kind of nonsense, the more likely it is said business will think twice about screwing you over.

    We've seen this reaction all over the place. Any time people are treated unfairly in any situation, cry out publically about it. This does change things.

    This story CLEARLY indicates wrong doing on their part. For example, anyone who has ever dealt with phone companies fixing their service knows that service providers are responsible for fixing problems with their own systems. When I got my second line installed, they had problems with line at a distro station. They didn't charge me to fix the problems there. If they had, I would have raised hell. But they didn't. They're responsible for it. End of story.

Slashdot Top Deals

"When the going gets tough, the tough get empirical." -- Jon Carroll

Close